At 24/10/2008 02:06 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
I nominate Alan Greenberg for the position as GNSO Liaison.
Best,
Adam
I accept this nomination. I have thought long and hard about whether I want to continue in this role in addition to the roles of Rapporteur for which I have also been nominated. I have decided that, should I be elected, both are appropriate. I understand that this will be a heavy load, but I am not a stranger to this. The reasons follow: - I think that I have been effective over the last two years. - Having started with the request for an issues report on expired domain names, I feel that I want to follow this through to the PDP stage. This will clearly be a major GNSO policy focus for me, and I do not think that adding the rest of the GNSO Liaison responsibilities to this will be unreasonable. - This will be year of very significant change for the GNSO, with the preparation and then actual transition to the new structure. I think that some measure of continuity will be very important to ensuring that our community is well served by that process. _ On the Rapporteur side, many of you may be tired of me repeatedly talking about the need to develop a better functioning and far more productive ALAC. There are several aspects to this. We need to address policy issues in a time manner, and to do this, we need to pick carefully what policy issues we address. To do this effectively, I think that we also need to streamline our administrative processes so that we do not have to continually focus on that part of our work. If the ALAC Review Mid-Point Consultation Report is any indication (and I think that it is a strong one), we are going to held accountable for our performance, and we do not have a lot of time to get ready. I believe that I can be helpful in both aspects. Alan