[Internal-cg] Role of liaisons was RE: Consensus building process
narelle.clark at accan.org.au
Fri Aug 22 03:09:23 UTC 2014
> -----Original Message-----
> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper
> Sent: Friday, 22 August 2014 10:44 AM
> One more item I forgot to mention — this document says nothing about
> the role of our two liaisons in decision-making. From my perspective I think
> the liaisons should be encouraged to engage in all discussions, but when it
> comes down to making consensus determinations, they should be recused.
Liaisons are there to:
- advise on processes for each of the bodies they liaise with
- report between the parties
- in the case of the IANA liaison to advise on IANA function itself
- co-ordinate interdependent timetables
- possibly other stuff I have missed.
I don't consider it completely appropriate for liaisons to be a full party to discussion. As with everything, I am willing to be convinced otherwise, but my initial reaction is that were they deemed appropriate as full members, they would be full members.
Please note, this is not intended as any negative on the behaviour or character of the particular individuals, rather the principle of liaison, and the potential impact from assertions that the ICG's task has been subverted by those to close to ICANN and IANA.
More information about the Internal-cg