Re: [council] PROPOSAL FROM GTLD CONSTITUENCY
At 18:06 27.03.01 -0600, Oscar A. Robles Garay wrote:
>We have two choices (not that A or B thing):
> - Say something, at least in a personal way
> - Say nothing, because lack of time and procedural reasons, and
> keep doing anything stronger than discussing in the NC.
We did the latter for some time now and that is why we lost most of our
credibility. Even worse: The Board was the first to bypass the NC when
we've proven to be unable to make a substantial policy recommendation on
new gTLDs. Today, even the GA and the DNSO constituencies do no longer care
too much about what we're doing. They're putting their drafts forward to
the Board immediately instead of waisting their time and ressources with
another hop over the Council. I understand and respect that this is
advantageous to at least one single constituency, but I don't have to buy
in - and this is why I'll certainly not vote in favour of the lastest draft
we've seen on this list.
If we continue on the line of "in the absence of a clear and (close to)
unanimous consensus we have to refrain from putting recommendations
forward" and just point to constituency or GA statements we'll be removed
from the queue and make ourselves completely superfluous.
>I take the first one.
So do I. I'm sure, it's our last chance to demonstrate good reasons not to
dissolve the NC.