[ga] Revised PDP Deadline -- Your Opinion is Urgently Needed

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

Yesterday the Names Council voted to extend the PDP
Timetable -- this decision violates the ICANN bylaws
which sets a strict timetable for the PDP.  While I
appreciate the offer of extra time, I remain concerned
by the Council's pattern of behavior.  In the course
of the last three years the Council has failed to
abide by any timetable whatsoever (no matter what the
issue).  

The goal of the prior ICANN "Reform" was increased
efficiency.  The PDP Timetable that we see in the
bylaws was decided upon through a process that
involved all Council representatives, was further
vetted by the Evolution and Reform Committee, was
subject to a Public Comment Period, and was ultimately
enacted by the Board.

The Council has argued that the PDP Timetable is
unworkable.  I beg to differ.  We on the GA have
followed the timetable without difficulty.  Our work
is proceeding on schedule, and the timetable is
eminently workable if a group actually chooses to get
down to work.

The GNSO Constituencies have not chosen this path. 
They haven't even started discussing the PDP on their
own constituency lists.  They haven't appointed
representatives to solicit their own constituency's
views on the topic.

Just because they aren't pulling their own load is no
reason to accept an action that would violate the
bylaws.  These bylaws were put in place after a long
period of discussion in order to offer assurances that
ICANN had predictable and understandable processes.

The ad hoc approach taken by the Council is a step
backward.  If they have issues with the PDP timetable,
they are well aware of the process involved to
formally request a bylaws change.

I think that this matter should be brought before the
ICANN Ombudsman.  I would like to hear your views.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com