Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #420
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Wednesday, April 25 2001          Volume 01 : Number 420

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 00:20:36 -0400
From: Kendall Dawson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Repost: InternetStakeholders.com 

Just for the record:

If you wish to unsubscribe from the ML - send a blank email to: 
[email-masked]

I apologize for any inconvenience. I was originally working with Sotiris 
and Joanna to help them create a
"supplementary" site for the WG-Review list. This became 
"InternetStakeholders.com". The mailing list was
created as a back-up just in case the NC pulled the plug on the other one.

But, I am one who has gotten tired of the arguments and 400 messages in my 
inbox every day.
The signal to noise ratio here is more than I can take..... maybe some 
other time?

Regards,

Kendall

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:16:14 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] All New

The Chair has my full support.

Patrick Corliss

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 01:16:47 -0400
From: Sotiris <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Repost: InternetStakeholders.com

Roeland Meyer wrote:

> I'm waiting for announcements of the new lists <tap> <tap> <tap> <tap> <tap>
> <tap> ...

Why?  what's wrong with this list?  Rather than sitting around waiting with you,
shouldn't the Chair and alt-Chair of this List set some kind of timeline and
agenda in motion?  Why must there be new lists for discussion to take place?  I
really cannot understand that...  What exactly would be the problem if a
schedule for discussion was set in motion on this List, and continued on each
new List, when and *if* they come into being?  Or, are we all just waiting for
Godot?  what's the holdup?

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 01:33:37 -0400
From: Sotiris <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Waiting for godot.com?

Let me see if I have this down correctly.

The chair of this list sanctions and encourages the formation of an
unofficial list, while at the same time leaving the official list in
some waiting-game limbo for an unspecified period of time.  Hmm.

I suppose *if* one did want to discredit the GA list,  there would be no
better way to go about it.  So, let's suppose the GA wallows in a
tailspin while all the work gets done on the unofficial
internetstakeholders.com site... which, of course, will thereafter be
pointed to as the replacement model for the DNSO's GA web site.  Hmm.

Of course, all this is unfounded speculation...

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:21:06 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] All New

Even though he has not recanted his earlier position declaring you in
complete conflict with your position?

Where does Mr. Joop weigh in on this matter.

Would you care to disclose the tlda meeting's confidential discussions?

You are a public figure and are not afforded the same grace as us
neophites.  Who did you launch your last complaint against?

I note "this is a formal complaint". Whats up with that?

Sincerely,

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> The Chair has my full support.
>
> Patrick Corliss
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:29:31 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Repost: InternetStakeholders.com

Ah, come on Sotiris these guys were making a valid point. Back off a little.  I
think we should wait until our leaders do something other than defend themselves,
after all they have the NC support.
And the five major stakeholders the staff thinks is important.

This is a shame!

Sotiris wrote:

> Roeland Meyer wrote:
>
> > I'm waiting for announcements of the new lists <tap> <tap> <tap> <tap> <tap>
> > <tap> ...
>
> Why?  what's wrong with this list?  Rather than sitting around waiting with you,
> shouldn't the Chair and alt-Chair of this List set some kind of timeline and
> agenda in motion?  Why must there be new lists for discussion to take place?  I
> really cannot understand that...  What exactly would be the problem if a
> schedule for discussion was set in motion on this List, and continued on each
> new List, when and *if* they come into being?  Or, are we all just waiting for
> Godot?  what's the holdup?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:53:27 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Abuse

Here is the Alt Chair in his finest clothery.  "Big never good"  Is the
GA caput, over and finished.  If so who stands for us dotcommoners?
Man, in twenty four hours I see no care but bystanders and ambulances.

Sotiris wrote:

> Counter charge.
>
> Complaint Against Danny Younger
> Grounds: Personal Attack, Insult and Slander
> "Your comments are ill-advised and serve no agenda other than
pointless
> vindictiveness."
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg01242.html
>
> By the way, our List chair was first with the personal attacks...  I
was
> merely following his example.  Attitude reflects leadership, or lack
thereof.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> Patrick Corliss wrote:
>
> > Complaint Against Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> > Grounds:  Personall Attack, Insults and Slander
> > States that the Chair has a "vindictive nature and predisposition".
> >
> > Regards
> > Patrick Corliss
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Sotiris <[email-masked]>
> > To: ga <[email-masked]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 8:11 AM
> > Subject: [ga] Reposting
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > I have stated the case quite simply.  To date, I have been nothing
but
> > > honest and forthright in all of my dealings on this and other
> > > related/relevant Lists.  I consider my personal integrity
important
> > > enough to stand up for it.  If anyone has shown evidence of a
vindictive
> > > nature and predisposition, it is the Chair Mr. Danny Younger.  I
offered
> > > Joanna Lane a chance to come clean, honestly and nobly.  Instead,
Mr.
> > > Danny Younger wishes to somehow implicate me in his designs.
> > >
> > > That said, let me add that the Chair can say what he likes, it's a
free
> > > Internet (but is he speaking or is someone else..?  kind of hard
to tell
> > > at this point).
> > >
> > > Fact is, the web site internetstakeholders.com belongs to Joanna
Lane.
> > > I may have supported the idea of another community web site, but I
did
> > > not support the stated agenda of the Chair of this list (i.e. to
have
> > > internetstakeholders.com become the official GA website).  It
seems kind
> > > of presumptuous of the Chair to believe that ICANN would add a
link to
> > > an outside website because the GA under his Chairness ratified
such a
> > > move.  I believe the current Chair is acting on interests counter
to
> > > those of the DNSO and ICANN in general.  He has gone beyond the
role of
> > > Chair of the GA and is clearly pushing an agenda for his own
reasons.  I
> > > cannot support his initiatives.
> > >
> > > These are my personal feelings.  I do not expect anyone else to
share
> > > them, but I am free to express them in this forum (that is, until
such
> > > time as the members of the GA are all "forced to be free" as
Rousseau
> > > put it).
> > >
> > > Thank You,
> > >
> > > Sotiris

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:46:30 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Repost: InternetStakeholders.com

Actually, Sotiris, it was a courtesy, IMO.  "Unsubscribe" is really 
simple for anyone who does not wish to participate.  According to those 
who object to that list, there should have been no announcement on this 
list and they should not have been subscribed to the other list.  In other 
words they should not know about it, nor should anyone else.  

This is precisely why my last post was made.  If one does not agree 
with the established program, one should just be silent and let things go 
the way they have been since the creation of ICANN.  Different thinking, 
methods, changes are not welcome.  

I disagree with you on this point (the list), Sotiris.  Since it was 
established due to the closing of WG list, subscribing those members 
to the continuation list was not a breach and those who don't want it 
should simply unsubscribe or ask the list manager to do it for them.  It's 
not a big deal.  It is also not as though all GA members were subsribed 
to it.

Leah

On 24 Apr 2001, at 23:10, Sotiris wrote:

> At the risk of being banned for excessive posts...
> 
> L Gallegos wrote:
> 
> > This is my personal opinion.
> > <snip>
> > Why would members of the GA object to this if the DNSO is not going
> > to provide that forum?  In addition, why would it be out of order to invite
> > people from this list (as the original invitees) to join the newly provided
> > forum?  It is not an abuse of the list to do so, IMO.  <snip>
> 
> Leah,
> 
> If the original members were *invited*, no problem... but they were *not* invited.
> They were signed up to a yahoogroup without their knowledge or approval.  This is
> technically a breach of privacy, and that is why it's out of order.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:55:25 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Repost: InternetStakeholders.com

Noise and volume, Sotiris.  The purpose behind having WG lists is form 
groups on specific topics.  It reduces volume on the main list and allows 
those who wish to work on those specific areas to do so without filtering 
though noise.  There are those on the main list who do not wish to hear 
it.

Leah

On 25 Apr 2001, at 1:16, Sotiris wrote:

> Roeland Meyer wrote:
> 
> > I'm waiting for announcements of the new lists <tap> <tap> <tap> <tap> <tap>
> > <tap> ...
> 
> Why?  what's wrong with this list?  Rather than sitting around waiting with you,
> shouldn't the Chair and alt-Chair of this List set some kind of timeline and
> agenda in motion?  Why must there be new lists for discussion to take place?  I
> really cannot understand that...  What exactly would be the problem if a
> schedule for discussion was set in motion on this List, and continued on each
> new List, when and *if* they come into being?  Or, are we all just waiting for
> Godot?  what's the holdup?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:58:50 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] All New

Eric,  all meeting minutes are published on the tlda website.  The last 
meeting minutes have not yet been approved, so it's not posted.  
However, it will be.  

Leah

On 24 Apr 2001, at 23:21, Eric Dierker wrote:

> Even though he has not recanted his earlier position declaring you in
> complete conflict with your position?
> 
> Where does Mr. Joop weigh in on this matter.
> 
> Would you care to disclose the tlda meeting's confidential discussions?
> 
> You are a public figure and are not afforded the same grace as us
> neophites.  Who did you launch your last complaint against?
> 
> I note "this is a formal complaint". Whats up with that?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Patrick Corliss wrote:
> 
> > The Chair has my full support.
> >
> > Patrick Corliss
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 10:24:24 +0200 (MET DST)
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Yesterday afternoon list problem

Yesterday afternoon, after some system upgrade on the dnso.org,
a problem arrised with mailling lists - corrected in the evening,
when analysing logs.

We apologize for inconvinience.

DNSO Secretariat

NB. The above problem, which happened yesterday, is not related
    to  an _apparent__list_problem_, with similar symptoms.
    Several people with multiple email addresses post from any of them,
    but not _all_ of that messages get to the list - when you do not 
    post from the one subscribed to the mailing list, your message 
    get bounced, does not show, and you may think there is mailling 
    list problem.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 04:34:11 -0400
From: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Alternative roots - on the NC agenda

Greetings, colleagues:

I have requested that the NC begin discussion on "alternate roots", at the
next NC telecon.

Eventually, the ICANN board will expect advice.

peter de bLANC
CCtld nc REP

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:04:49 -0700
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Repost: InternetStakeholders.com

It's simple, certain subjects can't be thouroughly discussed with a 5 post
limit. ie Inclusive root issues.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sotiris [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 10:17 PM
> To: Roeland Meyer
> Cc: [email-masked]'; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Repost: InternetStakeholders.com
> 
> 
> Roeland Meyer wrote:
> 
> > I'm waiting for announcements of the new lists <tap> <tap> 
> <tap> <tap> <tap>
> > <tap> ...
> 
> Why?  what's wrong with this list?  Rather than sitting 
> around waiting with you,
> shouldn't the Chair and alt-Chair of this List set some kind 
> of timeline and
> agenda in motion?  Why must there be new lists for discussion 
> to take place?  I
> really cannot understand that...  What exactly would be the 
> problem if a
> schedule for discussion was set in motion on this List, and 
> continued on each
> new List, when and *if* they come into being?  Or, are we all 
> just waiting for
> Godot?  what's the holdup?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> 
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:08:45 -0700
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Waiting for godot.com?

That's not what he said. Further, there is no proof of your allegations.
Patrick is doing what I'm doing. I also support the chair. More correctly, I
will not withdraw my support based on unfounded allegations.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sotiris [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 10:34 PM
> 
> Let me see if I have this down correctly.
> 
> The chair of this list sanctions and encourages the formation of an
> unofficial list, while at the same time leaving the official list in
> some waiting-game limbo for an unspecified period of time.  Hmm.
> 
> I suppose *if* one did want to discredit the GA list,  there 
> would be no
> better way to go about it.  So, let's suppose the GA wallows in a
> tailspin while all the work gets done on the unofficial
> internetstakeholders.com site... which, of course, will thereafter be
> pointed to as the replacement model for the DNSO's GA web site.  Hmm.
> 
> Of course, all this is unfounded speculation...

Precisely and a little/LOT less of this may actually let us get some work
done.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 05:48:05 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] New ICANN TLDs

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0CD4B.4C511F40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Here is something this group can sink their teeth into:

     http://www.lextext.com/icann/

    Do we have any comments on the new TLDs coming online soon?

/Bruce
"Let us reason together." 

- ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0CD4B.4C511F40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Here is =
something this=20
group can sink their teeth into:</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
</FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;<STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.lextext.com/icann/">http://www.lextext.com/icann/</A><=
/FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Do we have =
any=20
comments on the new TLDs coming online soon?</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana size=3D2>/Bruce<BR>"Let us reason =
together."=20
<BR></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=3DVerdana=20
size=3D2>&nbsp;</DIV></FONT></STRONG></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0CD4B.4C511F40--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:12:45 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting

At 18:59 24/04/01 -0400, Sotiris wrote:
>"William X. Walsh" wrote:
>
>> Incidents like this only further the fact that the Chair and
>> Alternative Chair are way too politically tied to their positions to
>> be able to be impartial and fair chairs to this assembly.
>>
>> A petition to the Names Council for their removal is probably in order
>> at this stage, if not overdue.
>
>If this is a motion, I second it.
>

I had not seen this WXW posting appear on the GA list. How *could* it be a
motion?

- --Joop--
Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
Developer of    The Polling Booth
www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 07:07:00 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting

>>I had not seen this WXW posting appear on the GA list. How *could* it be a
motion?

- --Joop--<<<

That is correct. *ONLY* postings on the [ga] list count.

/Bruce-LM
"Let us reason together."

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Joop Teernstra" <[email-masked]>
To: "Sotiris" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "ga" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 04:12
Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting

At 18:59 24/04/01 -0400, Sotiris wrote:
>"William X. Walsh" wrote:
>
>> Incidents like this only further the fact that the Chair and
>> Alternative Chair are way too politically tied to their positions to
>> be able to be impartial and fair chairs to this assembly.
>>
>> A petition to the Names Council for their removal is probably in order
>> at this stage, if not overdue.
>
>If this is a motion, I second it.
>

I had not seen this WXW posting appear on the GA list. How *could* it be a
motion?

- --Joop--
Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
Developer of    The Polling Booth
www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:41:38 +1000
From: "Dassa" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Reposting

|> -----Original Message-----
|> On Behalf Of Bruce James
|> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 10:07 PM
|> To: Joop Teernstra; Sotiris
|> Cc: ga
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting
|>
|>
|> >>I had not seen this WXW posting appear on the GA list. How *could* it
be a motion?
|>
|> --Joop--<<<
|>
|> That is correct. *ONLY* postings on the [ga] list count.

Actually this raises a point.  Although I would not consider the original
post in this instance as a motion, it does raise the question on the
validity of any GA member having been suspended, exercising their member
rights.

Once suspended from the list are the members rights to vote and move items
also suspended?

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 07:58:53 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting

The *right* to Vote in an election, is never lost.  Motions are lost.

The [ga-full] list is open to anyone. *Nothing* said on that list *counts*.
Anyone may say anything on the [ga-full] list.  Shoot, call me names on the
[ga-full] list, I don't care! Only the things said that appear on the [ga]
list *count*.

/Bruce-LM
"Let us reason together."

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Dassa" <[email-masked]>
To: "ga" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 07:41
Subject: RE: [ga] Reposting

|> -----Original Message-----
|> On Behalf Of Bruce James
|> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 10:07 PM
|> To: Joop Teernstra; Sotiris
|> Cc: ga
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting
|>
|>
|> >>I had not seen this WXW posting appear on the GA list. How *could* it
be a motion?
|>
|> --Joop--<<<
|>
|> That is correct. *ONLY* postings on the [ga] list count.

Actually this raises a point.  Although I would not consider the original
post in this instance as a motion, it does raise the question on the
validity of any GA member having been suspended, exercising their member
rights.

Once suspended from the list are the members rights to vote and move items
also suspended?

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 09:39:37 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Fw: Markup Time Change Notice

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Energy and Commerce Press" <[email-masked]>
To: "Energy and Commerce News" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 08:33
Subject: Markup Time Change Notice

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet markup originally
scheduled for Thursday, April 26, 2001 at 9:30 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn House
Office Building has been changed.  The markup will now begin at 9:00 a.m.
and will remain in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building.

The Subcommittee will meet in an open markup session to consider H.R. 1542,
"The Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act of 2001."

- ----------------------------------------
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce
W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, Chairman
(202) 225-2927
http://www.house.gov/commerce

/Bruce

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:19:47 -0400
From: "babybows.com" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Status Report -- Mailing Lists

STATUS REPORT:

Having reviewed the different proposals for new mailing lists, I have come
to a compromise that I believe will serve the current needs of this Assembly
and alleviate certain financial concerns expressed by an NC member:

1)  EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS [EXT]:
     ICANN Directors, Staff
     Names Council, other SOs,
     emerging constituencies & the public
     Outreach, Participation, Translations, Education, Website &
Communication

External Relationships:  To consider, build and enhance the General
Assembly's relationship with all external parties including, but not limited
to, the ICANN Board, ICANN as a body, the Names Council, other Supporting
Organizations, other internet organizations and the general public.

2.  INTERNAL PROCESSES	[INT]:
     Rules and Procedures of the General Assembly:
     Electoral Procedures
     List Rules & Protocols
     Mailing List Management

Internal Processes: To consider, build and enhance the General Assembly's
internal control processes including, but not limited to, its accountability
structures, electoral procedures, debating processes, mailing list rules and
system of management.

3.  SYSTEMS [SYS]:
     Registrant/Whois Privacy
     Registrar Accreditation,
     Registry-Registrar Separation
     Verisign Agreement (incl. .org)
     New registry agreements
     TLD roll-out
     Multilingual test-bed

Systems:  To consider and recommend improvements to all of ICANN's existing
policies, practices and procedures including, but not limited to
registry-registrar separation, registrar accreditation, quality assurance
and registrant/whois privacy as well as any contracts or agreements in these
or related areas.

4)  COMPETITIVE ROOTS [ROOTS]:
     Alternate Root Systems (Colliders)

Competitive Roots:  To consider and recommend policy improvements in
relation to ICANN's relationship with external or competitive root systems
including, but not limited to, what has been called alternate or inclusive
roots, and colliding top-level domains.

5)  TRADE MARKS-IP [TM]:
     Dispute Resolution
     WIPO-2

Trade Marks & IP:  To consider and recommend policy improvements in relation
to the use of domain names as a speech mechanism including, but not limited
to, its use for advertising, promotion, protest and criticism particularly
where such use may infringe on the rights or interests of other parties such
as trade-mark holders.

6)  DNSO REVIEW [REVIEW]

Ongoing DNSO review:  To consider and recommend proposals that improve
operations of the DNSO as it is constituted today and those which may result
in changes in the structure of the DNSO and/or major changes in its
functioning.

With regard to the technical concerns raised by the DNSO Secretariat:

1.  Opening date for the mailing lists:  original schedule targeted 1 May as
start date.  In deference to Elisabeth, as 1 May is her Labor Day, I am now
recommending advancing the start date to April 30.

2.  Closing dates for the mailing lists:  As it is expected that
participants to these lists will self-organize into committees, the decision
to close any particular list will be left to the discretion of such
committees but can reasonably be expected to occur subsequent to the final
report of such committee being issued.

3.  Posting Rights:  As the GA is an open forum for all willing to
participate, these lists will be open to all.

4.  Rules:  The GA general rules of decorum shall apply to these lists and
shall be enforced by the List Monitor Team.

5.  Posting Limits:  Discussion on this topic has ranged from no limits, to
a 5-post-per-day-per-list rule, to a 2-post-per-day recommendation.  As I
believe that this process should be as bottoms-up as possible, and as I have
no wish to stifle discussion, these lists will abide by the current
5-post-per day standard for the sake of decorum (unless it becomes the
decision of the Chair of any list committee to modify this rule in
accordance with the particular needs of such Committee).

Regarding cooperation with the Names Council:  As the Names Council is
responsible for the management of the consensus building process of the
DNSO, and as these mailing lists will serve as a vehicle to attain consensus
on a number of issues, it is incumbent upon this Assembly to respect the
role of the NC in authorizing such lists and in providing necessary funding
for such Web/Listserv Maintenance as may be required (drawn from their
line-item allocation of $30,000 for such expenses in the current budget).

Philip Sheppard has notified that Assembly that he will confer with the NC
regarding these lists, and has posted a note to the Council regarding this
matter on 19 April.  To date, there has been one reply to his post (from Ken
Stubbs) which comments:  "i would appreciate someone with a bit more
expertise letting the members of the council know what the economic impact
would be for servicing the potential number of lists indicated here."

As the Names Council has recently (17 March & 18 April) decommissioned five
mailing lists (Famous Trade - Marks working group B, new gTLDs working group
C, Business Plan and Internal Procedures working group D, Global Awareness
and Outreach working group E, and the Review Working Group), it is
reasonable to assume that the six new mailing lists of the General assembly
will not impose any new financial burden upon the NC, as these new lists
effectively are no more than a replacement for the WG lists previously
decommissioned (please note that one proposed list [roots] is already under
consideration by the NC as a possible working group topic, in which case a
list for this topic would have been needed anyway).

Knowing that the Names Council does not seek to micro-manage the affairs of
the General Assembly, I am not anticipating any delays, and I believe that
we can reasonably expect to receive a favorable reply from Philip Sheppard
on behalf of the Names Council soon.

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #420
************************