[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Precedent within ICANN -- another PDP's approach to polls -- no anonymity

[George Kirikos]

Hi folks,

The post at:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/2017-February/002167.html

establishes why polls, if used, must not be anonymous. Here's the salient point:

"While some WG members may not be fully comfortable with inclusion of WG
names and timestamps in future poll results, the leadership team believes
this decision reflects the majority desire for complete transparency in all
WG deliberations- including these informal polls - and aligns with the GNSO
Working Group Guidelines principles of transparency and accountability. As
stated previously, member responses to these informal polls are assumed to
be provided in their individual capacity and not as representative of any
groups to which they belong."

Given that the RDS PDP is one of the largest and most divided PDP,
it's worth noting that the responses to that post were ALL positive!
See:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/2017-February/date.html

(subject is "Update to RDS PDP polling process" -- a few messages at
the top of that page)

I think that precedent is dispositive of this issue. An anonymous poll
would not be aligned with the principles of transparency and
accountability. To do otherwise would represent an irregularity in
this PDP's procedures, which could undermine its legitimacy.

Not that any poll is even a proper tool at this point, as per my prior post:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2017-December/001000.html

(if discussions are complete, as claimed, there should be no polls,
unless we're in a rare situation after the iterative process has been
unsuccessful)

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/