Re: [ga] Re: Board descisions

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:06:14 +1100, Dave Crocker wrote:

>There is never enough time.  There are always constraints.  It is trivially 
>easy to put forward many complaints.

Yes it is but it is also trivially easy to judge if complaints are
trivial or have real substance.  IMO what has correctly been described
as proposed major policy reversals without time to consult is not
trivial.

>The hard work is in living in the reality of this world and trying to be 
>constructive.  The Names Council chose to waste its time complaining.

As I said elsewhere they do not have a mandate to make up policy on
the spot on their own.  their role is to seek consensus.  I'm suer as
individuals they had many views on the proposals.

>Even more fascinating is the implication that the Names Council believes it 
>should be part of contract negotiations.  I'd be interested in hearing 
>about other organizations that are involved in line management and 
>operations, that use such an inefficient management model.

This over-states the issue.  No-one suggests a committee should
negotiate a contract.  However it is usual for such negotiations to
take place within an approved framework or upon request from a Board.

This proposal was not requested by the DNSO or the ICANN BoD.  At no
stage did the staff seek Board or DNSO input as to what is or is not
acceptable to negotiate.  If they had then it might well be possible
to quickly endorse such a contract, but by failing to get any
negotiating framework it is little surprise that there are objections
from those elected to policy bodies.

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html