[At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] GNSO Council Motion on Cross-Community Working Groups
evan at telly.org
Tue Jan 17 21:17:26 UTC 2012
On 17 January 2012 15:23, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> People may wish to have a look at the Principles
> which specify that all SO/ACs involved should adopt and follow a single
> joint charter for CWGs, that CWGs outputs do not express community
> consensus per se, and so on.
Hi Bill. Thanks for the update, and for the efforts of you and the NCSG on
The GNSO is welcome to do whatever it wants to unilaterally regarding its
internal processes, but it cannot impose such regulation on others.
As happened with the JAS group, I for one will not abide by any imposed
regimen that prohibits an important effort from moving forward because a
community (or group of communities) refuses to agree on a charter (or tries
to scale back an existing one). Specifically, I would certainly not agree
to any move that artificially limited ALAC's bylaw-mandated scope by
excluding the interests of end-users.
It is significant -- and very telling -- that the GNSO policy about working
with other constituencies was itself formed in isolation from these
constituencies. This was definitely an opportunity missed, but I won't lose
sleep over it. It's my understanding that the At-Large Community has always
been eager to participate in cross-community groups, but we will not have
the terms of that participation dictated to us.
More information about the At-Large