Re: [ga] Comments on GA section of Review Task Force report
At 12:47 AM 2/2/01, JandL wrote:
> > Obvious oversight? or dereliction? Who (specifically) is/was in charge
> > of keeping track of such things (i.e. Roberto's term expiring and
> > selection process)? Is this not some sort of secretariat function?
> > or do NCers just scrawl this sort of thing on Post-it notes? How does
> > it work?
Sotiris, my impression is that the NC has had some problems grappling with
secretariat issues, and funding for staff. Additionally, they still don't
quite seem to have their intake function in order, though they certainly
seem to be trying to get better processes there.
>According to what I heard (and please correct me if I am wrong), it
>is not within the perview of the NC to make decisions regarding how
>the chair is elected.
At the present time, the NC elects the GA chair. Any change to that would
require a change in the ICANN bylaws. It would certainly be possible for
the NC to pass a resolution saying that their election of the GA chair
would be a rubber-stamp of a GA election, but I don't know if they've
>That seems to be the "out" for the NC when it comes to doing anything to
>assist the GA.
Danny Younger posted this URL on WG-Review, so we know the NC is now aware
of the issue. http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00197.html
On the other hand, the NC list archives haven't been updated since last
Saturday, and that URL shows that there has been traffic on the list, so
it's hard to say exactly what they're discussing.
For what it's worth, my impression is that the NC is more open to new ideas
now than they may have been previously.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html