Re: [registrars] Re: Drafting Committee Report

[StevenCoates@gatewayone.com (Steven Coates)]

Rita & All
I was one that wanted to participate,  but I did not receive a copy of the
policy which was to be discussed until the night before the teleconference.
I was unable to review the policy adequately until after the teleconference
call was over.  I was very disappointed to see that not one of the comments
that I have been trying to get in this document over the past several weeks
was either incorporated or discussed.  You say that a lot of people are
working in it.  Who are these people and how can we talk to them?  Why is
everything so secret?  ICANN is suppose to be open forum.  I have been
trying for week to get my comments heard and all I get is ignored.

You shift the methods of communication around such one is left without
either adequate notification or adequate time to prepare.  While I can't
speak of other registrars, I am trying to development a registration
business.  My resources are stretched thin.  What you are doing makes it
very difficult to participate.  Is this deliberate on your part?  On the one
hand, you are telling the world that you are not getting much participation.
While on the other, you make it very difficult to participate and then
ignore us when we try.  You go through the motions to say we are open door,
when in fact you are not.  This is the most closed door process I have ever
seen.  An elite few appointed by a nonelected board are determining what
everyone else has to live by, and when an accredited registrar wants to
help, he is ignored.  Since I don't appear to have a say in the policy, does
it follow that I won't have a vote in it either?
Steven Coates
EnetRegistry.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Rita Rodin <RRODIN@skadden.com>
To: registrars@dnso.org <registrars@dnso.org>
Cc: phils@netsol.com <phils@netsol.com>
Date: Monday, September 27, 1999 12:06 AM
Subject: [registrars] Re: Drafting Committee Report


>Hello - - in the interest of keeping everyone as informed as possible on
the activities of the drafting committee, I would like to report the
following.
>
>As I noted previously, due to time constraints, registrars participating in
the conference call on Friday discussed only the draft Policy and did not
comment on the draft Rules.  Accordingly, a call was scheduled for 9:00 EST
on Tuesday September 28 to go over the Rules.
>
>On Friday, I advised Louis Touton of the progress and substance of the
registrars' comments, and informed him of the Tuesday call.  I also told
Louis that the registrars participating on the Friday call were somewhat
disappointed at the relatively small participation rate, and attributed it
to the very short notice period.  We thus scheduled the next call for
Tuesday with the hope that more notice would facilitate a greater
participation rate.
>
>Louis informed me today that he had decided to post the Policy and the
Rules for public comment tomorrow, Monday night, notwithstanding that he
would not have received the registrar comments by that time, and
notwithstanding my adamant objection to this process.  I requested that at a
minimum, he clearly indicate when posting the Rules that it had not been
reviewed by, and thus was not consented to by, the registrar constituency.
>
>I suggest that we proceed with the Tuesday call as planned, but wanted
everyone to understand the process that is unfolding.
>

>------------------------------------------------------
>This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me at
(212) 735-3000 and permanently delete the original and any copy of any
e-mail and any printout thereof.
>