RE: [council] Draft NC Resolution reform
I totally support the remarks made below. The Board took the decision in Bucharest to move forward on the basis of the blueprint to ensure the impetus for reform was maintained. That certainly doesn't mean all is now a done deal. We have been in this position before on a number of ICANN issues and things have invariably changed. We would be failing in our duty of representing our constituencies if we just roll over and accept that 'we've done all we can'. Whilst we're unlikely to find the NC views are accepted in their totality, (did anyone ever believe they would be??) some aspects are still very valid.
Whilst I accept the need to consider some of the other issues that have been raised, they shouldn't dominate our thinking at this stage.
From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 16 July 2002 08:23
To: NC (list)
Subject: [council] Draft NC Resolution reform
While I do not disagree with further considering new issues such as the composition of the nominating committee, I do believe that the Board resolution is worth reading again. It was carefully worded for a reason.I made a synopsis of the Board resolution in the proposed NC resolution.
Of course the board adopted the blueprint - that was bound to happen, but the Board did more. It did not buy into every nook and cranny of the blueprint. It set conditions such as geographic diversity, it called for more consultation, it said new ideas not in the blueprint should also be considered.
To simply give up lobbying on an issue of fundamental importance based on the logic that it is all a done deal is something I find not to my taste and I believe NOT in sympathy with the Board resolution.
We are winning friends in the GAC on both sides of the Atlantic for the points in the NC resolution on geographic diversity. We need to ride this wave not let it pass.