[NCSG-Discuss] NCSG Questions & Concerns for our Representatives on the Accountability & Transparency Review Team (ATRT2)

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I wasn't in ICANN at the beginning, But when I started in 2005 there was a GAC Liaison in the GNSO who actually  participated from time to time.  Those who wee around n the days of DNSO and names council can probably give an indication on whether there was participation/lision way back then.

As for politics entering the process too soon: from the time the Issues report is published, politics is in the process.

avri


On 22 Jan 2013, at 14:29, Dan Krimm wrote:

> Thanks Avri for remembering my prior questions.  There is a certain poetic
> resonance to the idea of "accountable and transparent Accountability and
> Transparency Reviews."  :-)
> 
> 
> As for the GAC role, can the more veteran members here review for us what
> the GAC was supposed to accomplish when it was first incorporated into
> ICANN's policy-making structure?
> 
> My gut sense is that it was simply a way to allow governments to weigh in
> on GNSO policy sort of as a last step before Board consideration --
> perhaps with enough weight that in serious cases policy could be thrown
> back to GNSO for reconsideration?  But was the idea to try to hold off GAC
> (i.e., politics) to a large extent and first try to let the consensus
> process work its way through?
> 
> Of course, there is a lot of implicit politics in the consensus process,
> and so it's probably not accurate to see the consensus process as a pure
> rational dynamic devoid of power (i.e., political) considerations.
> 
> Acknowledging the politics inherent in the current (and perhaps any)
> implementation of the consensus process, the devil's advocate suggests
> that GAC might as well get involved earlier.  On the other hand, even if
> purity is not an option, at least we might push back as much as possible
> against politics entering the policy process too soon.
> 
> What I'd like to see is a more detailed discussion of this in the context
> of actual ICANN policy structures.  I haven't been directly enough
> involved recently to evaluate how things actually work in practice.
> 
> Dan
>