[council] reviews and work items (was Re: On the use of 'fairness' et al)
Hi, To change the subject a little, let me address some of the other themes in your message. In many cases, what I have is questions. On 26 aug 2005, at 12.32, Philip Sheppard wrote:
I don't understand how a comprehensive review is more ill-defined. Also isn't this done by an outside body. In which case how does it impinge on our ability to achieve our primary objective, which I assume remains the creation, updating and monitoring of ICANN policy and the fulfillment of requirements for improving GNSO/gTLD practice.
How is the council going about responding to these 17 unresolved items. Do we have teams or working groups assigned to each of them? I have been on a few calls so far and I do not remember, though perhaps I did not recognize, a time when we went through action items and status updates from working groups engaged in these issues?
Two thoughts on this. I would hope that we could have completed, or at least initiated solutions for, the current 17 items long before the end of 2006. And if there are another 20 improvements that we (or rather the council at that time) should make, wouldn't it be better to know what these were so that the council could start working on them? I know this may be easy for me to say as a newcomer who is not currently repsonsible for any action items. But I figure I am also fair game for task assignment. a.
|