Regarding David Maher's proposal:
I have indicated previously my preference that it be recast in terms
that give a more concrete definition of PAB's total role in the MoU
structure.
This isn't exactly a fair criticism -- it's really a variation on the
"rock" game (*). A fair criticism would be a constructive one, with
some proposal for PAB's role.
It is my belief, unfortunately, that coming up with such a proposal
is something of an academic exercise until we have a better idea what
the USG position will be, and, further, what the relationship between
the MoU and IANA will be.
If the MoU structure is decisive or at least seriously influential in
overall gTLD issues, if the ACPs turn out to be an important and exemplary
venue for dispute resolution, or the CORE SRS becomes a central
repository for most if not all gTLD information, then PAB has a strong
potential to become an important public policy forum.
If, on the other hand, the MoU group is just one of a potentially
large competing set of registries, then PAB and POC will have little
public policy influence, and most policy decisions will concern CORE
business policy. I think this last alternative is somewhat unlikely,
and that CORE/PAB/POC will be an influential force in gTLD policy, at
the least.
One of the things that will make it influential, I believe, is
its openness to public input. So, even though the situation is
confused and uncertain, it still seems worthwhile to iron out some
kind of meaningful group response to David's proposal.
Hopefully the following proposition will spark some discussion:
I propose that we accept David's proposal in spirit, with perhaps
some modification to the details of the voting scheme, with this one
addition/clarification: That nominees, like POC members from the other
organizations, not necessarily be from organizations that have signed
the MoU, and that further, PAB will solicit proposals for qualified
nominees through the gtld-discuss list and perhaps other fora.
Note that the way David's proposal reads, each PAB member can nominate
someone. So this last action is actually something that PAB members
can do individually -- I could, for example, post to the gtld-discuss
list that I am interested in nominating an individual to serve on the
POC as a consumer representative, and that I am soliciting likely
candidates. However, I think there is some considerable value to a
*policy* of soliciting nominees externally -- I think it would be a
powerful inducement for signing the MoU.
Comments, please.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) "Here's a nice rock" "I don't like that rock, give me another one."
-- Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:20 PST