DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index    

[comments-transfer] Ignoring the Rules

The current Names Council Rules of Procedure include a section entitled 
"Disputes and Role of an Interim Report" which stipulates that an interim 
report should contain: 

(a) an abstract of all proposals which achieved a meaningful level of 
(b) a clear statement of what is being proposed and its underlying rationale 
(c) an analysis of who and what systems might be impacted by the proposal 
(d) the specific steps that would be necessary to take to implement the 
(e) the costs and risks, if any, of implementing the proposal and how they 
would be borne 
(f) a statement of which stakeholders have been consulted about the proposal 
and what support the proposal has in the various stakeholder communities. 

The interim report that has been prepared by the Task Force is grossly 
deficient in that it does not attend to the above requirements.  This is also 
not the first time that such an interim report has been prepared in such a 
lax manner -- one has to wonder if there a particular reason why the Task 
Force can't abide by the guidelines set down by the Council?  I get the 
impression that you are more interested in meeting artificial deadlines (a 
final submission by Amsterdam) than in actually doing a thorough and 
responsible job.

If members of the Names Council aren't willing to abide by their own Rules of 
Procedure, why then should registrars abide by any set of rules that you seek 
to foist upon them?

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index