ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] Proposed amendment to BCUC motion


Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
What is the harm in undertaking such a study now, before voting to move
forward with radical policy changes (OPoC, or Ross' proposal) that have
only been outlined, and are far from implementable proposals?

What would be the harm of waiting for the results of such a study,
before deciding on a path to completion of work on this issue?

The requirements of the PDP are very clear. I think its time we get back to relying on the processes defined in the process. After constituencies have weighed in on a policy proposal, such as the one that staff is pulling together from the mess that was put forward by the WG and the TF report, the Council is required to determine whether or not the proposal merits a policy recommendation to the board.

If you believe that the policy proposal does not merit a recommendation to the board, then I would presume that you would vote against it and then recommend that the Council study the issue further in an attempt to better understand the issue. At the same time, my constituency will do the same, and likely recommend that Council proceed along the lines I've laid out in my motion.

I believe this is what Avri has outlined for us. What is the harm in following our bylaws and the work plan laid out by our chair?

--
Regards,

Ross Rader
Director, Retail Services
Tucows Inc.

http://www.domaindirect.com
t. 416.538.5492



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>