NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
William Drake <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
William Drake <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 20:04:32 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1319 bytes) , text/html (2417 bytes)
Hi Joy
> On Jun 16, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Joy Liddicoat <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> JL:Iadvocated for this one - it is really a very simple question and the Board's difficulty in understanding it may point more to checking that it is not somehow a trick question, which it isn't... It is simply a question as to whether they have given any considertaion to any trends or new issues beyond the new gTLDs that might arise in the next 3-5 years. The obvious answer is that if ICANN is bottom up community policy then it will be the community that takes new issues to the Board. This question is simply asking if the Board itself has been considering any 

Thanks and understood. I guess my point would be, normally the questions that work best are ones that elicit a clear line of dialogue and offer multiple people options for back and forth.  When we ask them a sort of blue skies “are you thinking about long-term trends” questions we can get perplexed squints and cursory replies because they’re consumed with yesterday’s crises and seeing us at the end of a long day of questions from multiple groupings. So in response to their query, "could you be more  specific? Are you thinking of/worrying about anything in particular?” how should we specify?

Best

Bill

ATOM RSS1 RSS2