Re: [icann-eu] Document on study working group?

[jeanette hofmann <jeanette_hofmann@yahoo.com>]

Hi everyone,

> > Assuming that the ICANN board adopts the staff
> recommendations on
> > the At Large Study Committee,

And why shouldn't it? 
The staff report doesn't say anything except for the
fact that the staff 
1. hasn't done anything regarding further
specifications of the study's scope
2. that they don't intend to provide any funding
3. that they expect the people who may conduct a study
to stay nonetheless within the originally proposed
time frame. 
All in all, the staff hasn't done anything but asks
all those who'd like to see the ALM survive to
contribute quite a lot. 
So, what is there to comment on? That we'd like to be
assured that the staff will take the time to read at
least the executive summary of the reports?

 there will be a
> 30-days period
> > following the conclusion of the MdR meeting during
> which the board
> > will solicit comments.
> > 
> > I'd like to suggest that we try to work out a
> consensus document on
> > these staff recommendations, and post it to ICANN
> during the
> > comments period.  I'm volunteering to edit such a
> document, based on
> > my own ideas and input from this list.  Once
> finished, there would
> > be a call for support on this list, in the hope
> that as many list
> > members as possible support the result.
> > 
> > Are there any objections against this procedure?  

In my view, the most important question right now is
how we achieve at least a minimum of coordination
among all those who might set out to make a post
election study. I wouldn't rely on any support by
ICANN's coordinating committee. We do not even know
whether it will be ever functional. 
Nonetheless, the composition of this committee is
another point that deserves attention. Those who serve
on this committee can't participate in the study and
vice versa. Who we propose for the committee therefore
needs careful consideration.

jeanette
> 
> Not from me. Please, go ahead. From a quick scanning
> of the
> document I am under the impression that this is
> merely about the
> procedure. How the study shall be done and by whom.
> This is important
> enough though to avoid a pre-cooked report.
> 
> So we suggest names as well?
> 
> -- 
> Marc Schneiders (rest in header)
> 
> 
> > If we can agree on
> > this, we should start collecting ideas on the
> staff recommendation
> > as soon as the board has declared that they will
> follow the
> > suggested procedure.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Thomas Roessler                        
> <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
> > 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays!
http://calendar.yahoo.com/