Page History
...
- Start by ensuring that members of each constituency working within the other constituencies’ WGs (liaisons). But this is often not enough.
- Must also make sure that input from an AC does not have less priority than input from any individual or any organization that submits a public comment. (In fact, input from an AC should perhaps have more priority.) For example: Recently, much time has been devoted to considering whether and when the GNSO Council will even accept input from ACs’ WGs.
- Helps – but is not enough – to make sure there’s diligent communication and input on both community-to-community and staff-to-staff levels.
- But this is not enough. Based on Rec. 13, the ALAC and other ACs will need to deal with this issue – but on a higher, ICANN-wide (GNSO-ATRT-SIC-Board) level than WT D. WT D has done everything it can via Rec. 13.
- Must also make sure that input from all ICANN constituencies has equal priority.
- An ALAC proposal must be submitted to David Olive to ensure that tasks 13.4, 13.5. and 13.6 are followed through on.
- It’d be very useful to list these points in the WT’s final reporting.
- An ALAC proposal must be submitted to David Olive to ensure that tasks 13.4, 13.5. and 13.6 are followed through on.
>> AI: Heidi to look into possibility of ensuring tasks 13.4, 13.5, and 13.6 via an ALAC recommendation to David Olive.
...
