Re: [ga] Policy development / improving Task Forces.
That is, you are advocating the "policy market" approach also
suggested by David Johnson in his earlier posting.
Still, there may be a desire for uniform policy development - either
because it's plain necessary (think "minimum requirements"), or
because it's economically desirable for some key players involved
(think "UDRP"). In both cases, you need a reasonable process.
So, once again - what do you folks think about the process
suggested, when applied within these limits?
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/
On 2002-04-04 10:45:53 -0500, Michael Froomkin wrote:
>Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 10:45:53 -0500 (EST)
>From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <email@example.com>
>To: Thomas Roessler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: [ga] Policy development / improving Task Forces.
>I think the difficulty of doing this right is one of the most powerful
>arguments for decentralization and parallel processing. ICANN's sole job
>would be to prevent inconsistent outcomes (e.g. two groups authorizing the
>On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>> Let's, for a moment, assume that ICANN goes for a bottom-up policy
>> development process, where the policy actually binds the board. How
>> should work be organized? The two obvious options we have are
>> (rather closed) task forces and (rather open) working groups.
>> For a while, I've been toying around with some ideas on how to
>> improve task forces - for, actually, I believe that it is reasonable
>> to do the "hard work" in a small group where most interest groups
>> are represented. One such idea which I have (in part) also been
>> proposing on today's names council call goes like this:
>> - Composition of task force (this was not in the call): Limited;
>> members from those constituencies/interest groups concerned. This
>> should always not be limited to the members of a certain SO
>> (assuming that there will be SOs), but there should be a flexible
>> way for other groups to participate if needed. Example: The GAC
>> should probably participate in policy development on issues they
>> have introduced into the discussion, such as country names in
>> .info. With other topics, consumer advocates, experts, etc.,
>> should be included.
>> - Most work should happen on a publicly archived mailing list, plus
>> telephone conferences. Minutes of such conferences should be
>> posted to the public list.
>> - There should be professional staff on the task force, which should
>> be independent of any special interest groups involved. This staff
>> should AT LEAST be responsible for producing a final report. I'd
>> actually suggest that such staff should CHAIR the task force
>> (working group, whatever).
>> - Deadlines. There should be tight deadlines, and these should be
>> respected. Nobody should be able to win by procrastinating. In
>> the worst case, some groups' input may have to be ignored.
>> - Such policy development must be balanced with appropriate
>> independent review. Topics of review should, in particular, be
>> the quality of outreach
>> - The review panel (or however it's called) should have the power to
>> add parties (constituencies, ...) to the process for the future.
>> In such a process, a GA (or at large membership, or whatever) would
>> serve as for the representation of interested individuals, and also
>> send representatives.
>> I'm not sure who should initiate or manage such a process: This
>> could either be the board (one may hope that they don't ignore their
>> own task forces), or it could be some kind of SO council. It
>> should, however, be noted that a names council or equivalent would
>> not necessarily be needed for this process to work.
>> (Please try, as far as you can, to limit discussion of constituency
>> individual groups, board composition, and the like, in this thread.
>> I'll try to address this in a different context.)
> Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
>A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | email@example.com
>U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
>+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
> -->It's hot here.<--
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