On 22/03/2013, at 10:00 PM, [log in to unmask] wrote:

It seems to me that there may be a good topic for the SG to raise with the Board here during the Board-NCSG meeting in Beijing. Several recent developments such as: (1) the Board's unilateral contract amendment power for both Registry and Registrar Accreditation Agreements; (2) the sudden introduction of the PIC Specification (presumably related to GAC pressure); (3) the imposition of a to-be-determined new WHOIS policy; and, now, (4) the adoption of much of the TM "strawman" proposal - all call into question the relevance and sanctity of the GNSO's policy development processes.

This relates also to the whole "policy vs implementation" discussion that's ongoing.

Two ideas for the group to consider, therefore:

(1) [To our Councilors] Will the GNSO Council stand aside and allow these process runarounds to occur?

As a councillor, I feel very strongly about the strawman decision, especially the '+50' decision. We haven't discussed specific action yet, but I'm sure it will be discussed in Beijing, and I will be pushing for the strongest possible objection from the council.

Regards

David