[governance] The frustrating situation with the GNSO

Danny Younger dannyyounger at yahoo.com
Wed Dec 21 09:59:19 EST 2005


I agree with your assessment:  "this process is by no
means a
useful policy development or policy analysis process".

What I find particularly troubling, however, is the
"Committee of the Whole" process adopted by the
Council that has replaced a "Task Force" process that
has been in use for the last three years.

At least a task force would have already had a
discussion list started on this PDP, but the Committee
of the Whole (the Council itself) has not even begun
to take a look at any of the PDP issues.  

Years ago we had a very workable system -- the working
groups.  These groups were open to anyone that wanted
to participate in the policy development work of the
GNSO.  The working groups produced recommendations
that were forged in the fires of debate.

Unfortunately, some of these working groups also
produced results that "disturbed" certain Council
representatives, and open public participation in the
process was henceforth eliminated.

That left us with task forces populated primarily by
GNSO Council reps (many of whom never participated in
any discussions whatsoever).  

As bad as that was, this new Committee of the Whole is
even worse.  If they perform true to form, all you
will see is an occasional teleconference and a final
paper that offers nothing more than a restatement of
constituency positions.

The last such Committee of the Whole was convened to
offer guidance on the very same topic -- expansion of
the namespace.  Their final report may be found here: 

The way things are going in the GNSO, I won't be
expecting anything more than witnessing a few folks
dusting off this old work-product and then issuing
basically the same set of remarks that they set forth
two and a half years ago.


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org

More information about the Governance mailing list