[Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

[Jonathan Robinson]

Thanks Gema,

 

Useful input and I am especially mindful of the need to use plain, simple
language for the benefit of all, including English speakers.  So support for
that.

 

To the point on birds of a feather.  BOF has the dictionary meaning you
highlight and is, in my experience, generally applied as a comment by a
third party to a group of others referred to as “birds of a feather”.

In this context, the meaning is slightly different in that it generally
seems to be applied to an invitation to individuals to form a group.  Others
may be more familiar with the use in policy making / ICANN context.

 

Jonathan

 

From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria
Sent: 21 January 2014 13:33
To: GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

 

Thank you for the draft list of definitions, Jonathan. 

 

It´s quite revealing to know that “GNSO consensus policies” and at large,
ICANN consensus policies are not policies struck at necessarily by consensus
(agreement) but, rather, with the participation of all stakeholders. The
term encompasses a process to pass policies –which is described at Annex A
of the Bylaws and the PDP Manual and which specifies several majority
options to approve policies- and a list of matters on which a PDP is
feasible, which are included in the sections called “consensus policies and
temporary policies” in the Registrar and Registry agreements with ICANN.

 

One last remark pertaining to the “GAC engagement on the GNSO Policy
Development Process” table: the dictionaries I´ve looked up explain that
“birds of a feather” is part of a proverb which means that people who think
alike or belong to the same class or have similar habits end up being
friends or a team. That leads me to think that when the table uses this
expression is thinking of an homogenous group of GAC members, what would be
out of any logic since the GNSO would only have the vision of like-minded
members of the GAC. Please, tell me if my understanding is correct. 

 

A more general request I would make is to try to use plain simple English
being mindful of the difficulties and misunderstandings language may cause
in non-native speakers, as I´ve seen the ATRT 2 report advises. 

 

I hope you have a fruitful call. 

 

Best regards,

 

Gema

 

De: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] En
nombre de Jonathan Robinson
Enviado el: martes, 21 de enero de 2014 12:23
Para: GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Asunto: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

 

All, 

  

One of the many parallel threads going on is the work being undertaken by
the Policy & Implementation WG. 

  

They have undertaken some initial work on common understanding of
definitions which is nearing a final draft form. 

I believe you may well find it helpful background to read through the draft
definitions (Attached). 

  

N.B. 

  

These working definitions have been developed for the  limited use by the
GNSO Policy & Implementation Working Group to facilitate their discussions
and deliberations on the questions outlined in the working group’s charter.
These definitions are expected to evolve as a result of the WG
deliberations. At the end of the process, the WG is expected to review these
definitions, add/update as deemed appropriate and include them in the Final
Report. 

  

  

Thanks. 

  

Jonathan 

  

  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20140121/246d3e39/attachment.html>