Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this content. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Version History

« Previous Version 3 Current »

Recommendation 36

That, when approving the formation of a PDP WG, the GNSO Council require that its membership represent as far as reasonably practicable the geographic, cultural and gender diversity of the Internet as a whole.  Additionally, that when approving GNSO Policy, the ICANN Board explicitly satisfy itself that the GNSO Council undertook these actions when approving the formation of a PDP WG.

Working Party (initial assessment of feasibility and usefulness): CG - Accept with modification:  Because circumstances vary so much from WG to WG, the qualification of ‘reasonably practicable’ is important to include.  How would ‘reasonably practical’ be defined?  How would it be measured? What if a judgment is made that ‘reasonably practical’ measures were not taken to obtain diverse WG membership?  Should the efforts of volunteers over many months be rejected if  it was not possible to get participants that meet diversity goals?
Staff (initial assessment of feasibility and usefulness):
  • Accept As-Is
  • Accept With modification
  • Reject

Rationale:

MK: Accept with modification. This is aligned with current requirements, although a definition would need to be provided as what is considered representative of the geographic, cultural and gender diversity of the Internet as a whole. Also, the recommendations does not take into account that some participate in a PDP WG as representatives of a group in which such diversity may be present - should that also be factored in when making this assessment?

Basis for Assessment: 
Work in Progress:Current practice as specified in GNSO rules & WG Guidelines
Expected Completion Date for Work in Progress: 
Milestones: 
Responsibility:Council/WG chairs

 

 

Recent updates

Show More Please wait
  • No labels