RE: [council] GNSO Review

[<Niklas_Lagergren@xxxxxxxx>]

I very much share Philip's concerns as expressed below as well as the starting 
point he suggests to assess the GNSO's structure and methods. Periods of 
introspection are always useful - we should certainly avoid the trap of 
floccinaucinihilipilification* - but we should not think that we have to start 
from scratch here. Lots have been done already.

Cheers,

Nik

 

* For the non-English speakers among us, please note that this word IS included 
in the "Oxford English Dictionary" (I just had to use it once :-)). 

 

  _____  

From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@xxxxxx] 
Sent: jeudi 4 août 2005 9:22
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] GNSO Review

 

Before we all get carried away on great and good ideas on this review, can we 
agree on the scope of the review? 

We have already done an ICANN evolution and reform process (ERP) - no one I 
HOPE - wants to repeat that in the context of the GNSO ?

We have already done a GNSO Council review and agreed actions as a result - no 
one I HOPE - wants to duplicate that ? 

Therefore the scope question is surely: 
Given the purpose of the GNSO, 
Given the current structures / networks / methodology, 
How effective are these structures / networks and methods? 

Anything more - such as comparison to other models - I suggest is out of scope. 
That may be relevant if we conclude structures / networks / methods are broken 
or useless, but that should inform a second tier of work ONCE the ineffective 
bits are identified.

If there is a proposal to repeat the evolution and reform process work for the 
GNSO, I plan a long holiday. 

Philip