DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [tor-udrp] Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 11:59:23 -0500

Good start, CC. 

I intend to come up with a draft mission statement and list of topics to be 
addressed some time in the next week. I encourage 
others to do likewise. We can flog each other's drafts and we should be
able to come up with something by Stockholm.

The specific format of the "task force" is something I need to think 
about more. Good idea to include panelists, possibly provider reps, we
might also want to include an aggrieved respondent's lawyer and an
aggrieved complainant's lawyer or rep.

>>> "Chicoine, Caroline G." <CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com> 05/09/01 01:03PM >>>
In light of today's call, my take was that we should tkae a stpe back and
simply provide the outline of what needs to be done and that preparing the
questionnaire may go too far.  Do others agree?

If so, I believ our terms of refence should include an overall "mission
statement" and indicate that we recommend that a small "task force" be
formed starting at the Stockholm meeting to spend the month if July to come
up with the questionnaire.  I believe the Task Force should remain small and
include the relevent "experts" as discussed in today's call.  I would throw
out that the Task Force should one member from each Constituency, one
panelist from each provider, and one representative from each provider (of
course if these people do not want to participate that is their choice but
at least we reached out).  The questionnaire would be disseminated during
the month of August, and the Task Force woudl be charged with reviewing the
results and preparing a summary of the issues identified during the month fo
Septemeber with a proposal to set up the necessary working groups to start
discussing the issues in October with the hopes that soem consensus
positions could be put forward at the November LA meeting?  Milton, if your
efforts regarding the statistics are available by the beginning of August,
we could have the Task Force review it (as well as any other third party
efforts in this regard) while they are waiting for the questionnaire
responses to incorporate into the process as they deem appropriate.. 

Again, I just throw this out to get the discusion going and in no way
presume I have thought of everything.  I just want to keep the momentum
going so we have a concrete plan to present in Stockholm and thus build
confidence with everyone that the NC can successfully tackle substantive

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>