Avri, Are you saying that what I proposed does not satisfy this: " transparent process that is open to and inclusive of all stakeholders interested in participating in the development of the proposal "? Chuck -----Original Message----- From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 2:34 PM To: cwg-dt-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Update from the GNSO and draft call for observers for your review Hi, I think allowing for non-joiners and other exceptions is the only way to achieve "open to and inclusive of all stakeholders interested in participating in the development of the proposal" As the RFP indicates:
Proposals should be supported by the broad range of stakeholders participating in the proposal development process. Proposals should be developed through a transparent process that is open to and inclusive of all stakeholders interested in partici pating in the development of the proposal. In order to help the ICG maintain its light coordination role, all interested and affected parties are strongly encouraged to participate directly in these communi ty processes
And yes, this can make managing the effort more of challenge. But I think that is part of the task to be solved. Like all observers, they will be able to speak their mind freely with the proscribed etiquette for the group. avri On 10-Sep-14 11:04, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am not yet convinced (but maybe could be) that we should accommodate 'non-joiners' as you suggest. I am not suggesting that they would formally have to join applicable groups but only that they would be allowed to participate in those groups' processes for this effort. My concern is that it might greatly complicate the work of the CWG if there are lots of non-joiners participating as individuals while the SGs, Cs, etc. are participating via representatives of commonly situated groups. How would we manage that efficiently?
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:57 AM To: cwg-dt-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Update from the GNSO and draft call for observers for your review
On 09-Sep-14 18:48, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I think unaligned observers could be handled in different ways. One way is certainly to allow them to directly participate in the CWG. Another way would be to have them participate via existing organizations. A third way would be some combination of the first two.
I am comfortable with a hybrid approach.
In many ways it is best if these 'outsiders' can be brought into being 'insiders'. And all sorts of outreach and co-option as you suggest should be done.
But there are also those who are non-joiners or are displeased with the way our insides are structured, who would prefer to remain outsiders participating as outsiders. We need to be sure to be open to them as well.
avri _______________________________________________ CWG-DT-Stewardship mailing list CWG-DT-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-dt-stewardship
_______________________________________________ CWG-DT-Stewardship mailing list CWG-DT-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-dt-stewardship