Some questions that are actually directed at
staff or only staff can answer. They are always
being called up during the open forums. So long
as it's said at the time that a named staff
person will take the question away, the
questioner agrees, and staff will post the
question and answer, then should be fine.
Important that the person asking has the
opportunity to agree to having their question
taken in that way.
Perhaps add a sentence so the relevant part reads:
It is also noted that ICANN staff, under
direction of the Chairman, allowed for questions
to be posted after the Meeting and subsequently
answered by appropriate staff. The GNSO Council
applauds this innovation particularly with the
staff providing responses to direct questions.
*However, questions should only be deferred in
this way with the agreement of the person asking
the question during the open forum.*
Make sense?
Adam
>I agree with Norbert's statement whole-heartedly.
>
>Robin
>
>On Feb 4, 2009, at 8:10 AM, Norbert Klein wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, 4 February 2009 22:53:04 Milton L Mueller wrote:
>>
>>
>>I agree, this is a very important, fundamental point:
>>
>>if the functions and roles of board and staff are not clearly seen as what
>>they are - very separate levels of responsibility - it is easy that the
>>control of certain processes gets located at the wrong level.
>>
>>And the fact that the GNSO Council took the fact that there was limited
>>communication between the ICANN public at the Cairo meeting and the Board as
>>an occasion to write to the Board and appeal for rectification, shows also
>>the opinion that it is important to uphold the role of the Board against all
>>dangers of being weakened.
>>
>>I am more interested what the Board hears and decides, than what is reported
>>to be "the opinion of some [unnamed] people at ICANN."
>>
>>
>>Norbert Klein
>>
>>=
>>
>>>I would support Avri's statement for the most part. My only quibble would
>>>be to be careful about this: " ICANN staff, under direction of the
>>>Chairman, allowed for questions to be posted after the Meeting and
>>>subsequently answered by appropriate staff."
>>>
>>>While obviously staff should answer questions directed to them, i would not
>>>want to encourage ICANN to treat this kind of staff mediation as a
>>>_substitute_ for direct interaction with the Board at Public Forums
>>>
>>>Milton Mueller
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>If you want to know what is going on in Cambodia, please visit
>>The Mirror, a regular review of the Cambodian language press in English.
>>
>>This is the latest weekly editorial:
>>
>>Censorship: Thousands of Crude Porn Sites Accessible on Internet - One Khmer
>>Artist Blocked
>><http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com/2009/02/02/censorship-thousands-of-crude-porn-sites-accessible-on-internet-%E2%80%93-one-khmer-artist-blocked-sunday-122009/>http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com/2009/02/02/censorship-thousands-of-crude-porn-sites-accessible-on-internet-%E2%80%93-one-khmer-artist-blocked-sunday-122009/
>>(To read it, click on the line above.)
>>
>>And here is something new every day:
>><http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com>http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com
>>(English)
>><http://kanhchoksangkum.wordpress.com>http://kanhchoksangkum.wordpress.com
>>(Khmer)
>>
>>PGP key-id 0x0016D0A9
>>
>
>
>
>
>IP JUSTICE
>Robin Gross, Executive Director
>1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
>p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
>w:
><http://www.ipjustice.org>http://www.ipjustice.org
> e: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
|
