> Dear PAB,
>
> In order to assist the POC in formulating their RFC concerning a change in
> the composition of POC, I would like to propose a straw poll -- *not
> official, not binding* -- to answer these questions. These are not the
> questions POC would necessarily ask; they are questions that I think the
> PAB should ask itself, and answer, as a result of the proposal:
>
>
> 1. Should the PAB and POC become one organization, with the POC as the
> Executive Committee of PAB?
> [X ] Yes [ ] No
> Comments:
I believe this was originally mentioned at the first pre-PAB meeting
1 of may in Geneve which I thought was informally agreed to be the
natural evolution of the gTLD policy deciding body.
> 2. If the PAB and POC are separate bodies, should the PAB reps on POC have
> a duty to report to PAB on POC proceedings, formal or informal, unless
> specifically requested not to do so by POC?
> [ ] Yes [ ] No
> Comments:
Abstain! Se 1.
> 3. Should the POC be expanded to bring in other constituencies
> [ ] Yes [X ] No
> Comments:
At least not above some workablelimit. I beleive when creating the
IAHC (of which POC has grown) on aspect was to create a workable
group of people wityh respect to the number of participants. This is
still valid.
> 4. If the POC is expanded, should the PAB elect 9 of its 18 voting members?
> [X ] Yes [ ] No
> Comments:
Well, at least half way!
I have no opinion on the remaining questions. It seems we are trying
to move two ways at the same time. The formal way with voting and
representation as within ISO, ITU etc, and the Internet way with
rough consensus where anyone having a reasonable interest is allowed
to participate. My opinion goes along the Internet way. Those having
a reasonable interest here are those having signed the gTLD-MoU
and by that being able to participate in the PAB. And for the same
reason I see POC/PAB as one organization where POC is the executive
board of PAB.
Regards,
Bernhard.