Re: [ga] Notes from today's NC call.
Thomas has mentioned a proposal put forth by the IPC:
<< J. Scott Evans of the Intellectual Property constituency gave some
insights about the current IPC thinking about future policy
development. One proposal seems to be to move it to the Board level
and to create ad hoc and/or standing committees with members picked
based on expertise, with staff and board liaisons. >>
Allow me to comment on why this is a horribly bad proposal (using a real-life
Ms. YJ Park was nominated to participate on the President's TLD Evaluation
Task Force. YJ is known to many of us for her critical observations. In a
letter posted today to the NCDNHC at
http://www.icann-ncc.org/pipermail/discuss/2002-April/001951.html YJ states:
Here is an instance where a well-respected member of our community was
ejected from a meeting that she had every right to attend by ICANN
Management. I wrote to YJ to make sure that I had correctly understood her
<< Are you stating that Stuart did not want you to attend and participate in
that meeting, or that you (for some reason) were called away from that
She replied: <<The former.>>
Standing Committees whose participants can be chosen and deselected by ICANN
management at whim are not in our best interest as structures in a reformed
My sympathies go out to YJ.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html