Eric, I would agree that the Board already has good advice from the SSAC. However, it appears that the Board, having received this advice, may not be following it. There may be value in the ALAC being vocally supportive of the SSAC work -- without re-inventing it -- and informing the Board that in ALAC's view going against SSAC053 is against the public interest. If the Board had fully heeded its AC's advice we would not be having this discussion, and the Board would have trusted the SSAC advice rather than needing third-party consultation and evaluation. At very least it would have deferred the issue until the current round has been delegated (which is what my original point was about). On 10 June 2013 11:19, Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net>wrote:
Colleagues,
I suggest that the first issue to consider is whether the Board is in possession of the best advice on the subject from some other AC, and if so, is further advice from another AC, ALAC in particular, can in fact inform the Board.
In my view, the Board already has the best advice on the subject from an AC and no communication from another AC can in fact inform an already informed Board.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56