Re: [registrars] The New Responsive ICANN

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 8/13/2003 8:46 AM Elana Broitman noted that:

> I believe that it's all the varied voices.  The policies have been determined.  This group is not about changing policies. It is about giving ICANN advice as they go about implementing the policies.  That's why it's quite informal.
I was under the impression that this was a formal part of the policy 
implementation process, especially limited to providing the ICANN staff 
with advice regarding specific implementation details - not an ad 
hoc/informal effort, nor a policy determination effort. I've got another 
call with Tina this week and I'll bring this up with her so that I'm 
completely clear what the mandate of this group was. I thought I was 
clear on this point, but I'm getting conflicting signals. I hope that 
our constituency has the opportunity to formally put forward specific 
representatives that can look out for our collective interests. I'm not 
comfortable with unelected appointee's providing informal advice that 
they have no accountability for (or worse, conflicting accountabilities 
for.)
In all cases in the past, we have held elections to put forward 
representatives to committee's and groups like this. Why should it be 
any different this time around?
I suppose it all boils down to who specifically was being asked to 
participate. If the ICANN staff wanted someone from register.com to 
participate, then I suppose that this makes sense - if the staff was 
looking for a representative from this constituency, then its an 
entirely different matter. I guess I should inquire as to the specific 
nature of the staff request as well...
--


                       -rwr