17.12.08 GNSO WHOIS Discussion

[William Drake]

Hi,

I believe tomorrow there is another WHOIS call.  Avri helpfully  
suggested changing the ranking system to numeric, which will better  
reflect constituency views (e.g. NCUC could rank studies as 0 rather  
than low priority) and allow more precise aggregation of results.   
But it's a bit hard to numerically express constituency views without  
having heard what they are, so any actionable feedback would be  
appreciated.

The recs etc are here https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi? 
whois_references and the current xls file is here https:// 
st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?whois_discussion.

If no more precise input is forthcoming, shall I just ask that zeros  
be recorded for our priority assessment of each proposed study, and  
that our feasibility assessments be left blank?  A bit lame, but  
maybe better than not responding at all...

Thanks,

Bill


On Dec 12, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> Thanks, Bill for this great report and set of action items.
>
> Can we agree on how to proceed?
>
> a.  Rank all studies Low Priority, or No Study Needed?   
> Differentiate and maybe identify one or two as potentially  
> desirable, to show willingness to compromise?
>
> Perfect.
>
> Reach out to RC and ALAC, or don't bother and just do our bit?
>
> If you have time, definitely reach out to RrC; ALAC will be more  
> difficult because they have “processes” to follow, but maybe our  
> new ALAC liaison could help us out here.
>
> Who would like to do the coordination and physical inputting of  
> responses?
>
> Due to my need to travel on the early morning (European time) of  
> the 18th, I cannot volunteer to do this. I would otherwise. Robin?
>

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
   Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
New book: Governing Global Electronic Networks,
http://tinyurl.com/5mh9jj
***********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20081216/2a74f362/attachment.html>