Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #454
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST             Sunday, May 13 2001             Volume 01 : Number 454

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

Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:28:13 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re:  2001-2002 Budget

This seems to me to be a fair suggestion, Peter.  For that matter, if you 
are going to be there, I would certainly nominate you as interim chair for 
the Stockholm meeting in the absence of our Chair and Alternate Chair.

Leah

On 12 May 2001, at 11:06, Peter de Blanc wrote:

> Why not let the GA debate take place in stockholm using an interim chair
> selected from someone who is already in stockholm.
> 
> I see no reason to not hold the GA!
> 
> I co- chaired a GA meeting once, and I paid my own expenses.
> 
> peter
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jefsey
> Morfin
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 10:02 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Re: 2001-2002 Budget
> 
> 
> Dear Joop,
> I do not think it is very fast. I just follow the day after
> the alt-chair indications to the iCANN Chair:
> 
>  > I'm afraid it will be very difficult for the DNSO General
>  > Assembly to take part in any debate in Stockholm as
>  > neither the Chair or the Alternate Chair have received
>  > any DNSO funding to attend. My application to Salzburg
>  > Seminar has also been refused.
>  > Would you advise whether ICANN could fund these
>  > travel expenses?
> 
> The iCANN Chair having reponded negatively.
> The delay in discussing it internally, to have the Chair
> coordinating with the NC and he GA to vote makes
> the time very short. Will I remind you the problems
> encountered by Harald before MDR with a rush vote.
> 
> Jefsey
> 
> On 13:02 12/05/01, Joop Teernstra said:
> >On 12:47 12/05/01 +0200, Jefsey Morfin said:
> > >This is an urgent matter to address.
> > >
> > >Could our legal gurus advise so we may vote asap on it.
> > >Otherwise we will receive a mail from Danny telling us
> > >wich solution the GA has decided.
> > >
> > >Question: Could Vint chair the GA assembly (this would
> > >put him in front of the problems)? Who is to decide: the
> > >GA or the NC (I suppose the NC is the only one to be
> > >able to decide of a Proxy, but the GA may suggest a name).
> > >
> > >Which alternate name would you want to put forward?
> > >
> >Well, that's very fast , Jefsey.
> >We have not heard from Danny yet, if he cannot make it to Stockholm on his
> >own.
> >
> >After all, he was able to make it to Melbourne, which is a lot farther.
> 
> --
> 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-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: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:51:30 -0400
From: "babybows.com" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re:  Channels to create an IC

My personal view...

Bill Lovell has raised the issue of the role of the Names Council with
regard to the creation of an Individuals' Constituency.

Subsequent to the report of the Names Council DNSO Review Task Force, the
Names Council put forth a Business Plan (20 Feb) which stated (under the
heading "Strategies"), "Establish an interim committee to propose terms of
reference for an NC task force or other group to implement the following:
5.4 Individuals Constituency. Review the need, uniqueness, potential
contribution and representiveness of an individual domain name holder's
constituency."

The last Names Council teleconference bore witness to the fact that none of
the Names Council "Interim Committees" have yet established any "terms of
reference" for any new project cited in the Business Plan - they are
"hoping" to get this work accomplished by Stockholm.

Three months to pose the most basic "terms of reference"... This is yet
another example of the abject failure of the constituency structure model.
That one set of constituencies can vote to threaten the voting rights of
other constituencies is still another example of the folly of this
structure.

I remind you that the majority of the members of the Review Working Group
called for the abolition of this constituency structure (supporting the
initiative of Director Karl Auerbach to roll the constituencies back into
the GA on a one-man-one-vote basis).

It's time to move forward on the basis of conclusions already reached.
Creating new constituencies does not solve our problems (especially if they
can't afford to vote).  The Board has expressed its willingness to consider
structural changes in the DNSO (resolution 01.28).  It is time to push the
Names Council to get on with its job until such time as it is dissolved and
replaced by a structure that better guarantees full representation.

The only people that I have seen pushing for an Individuals' Constituency
are the few members of the idno that will occasionally strike up a
conversation on their own list.  When Joop fails to post on this topic on
the GA list, no one else posts on this topic.  Where is the true measure of
support?  The idno Chair has not even come forward to support the motion
recently put forth, and frankly has not even participated on the idno list
since January.

An effort has been made to discourage bringing up the past history of the
idno.  This history is an issue that warrants discussion.

Make no mistake about it, if an Individuals' Constituency is created, the
idno will be the first organization in line seeking to represent
individuals.  If they can't get sufficiently organized to present their own
petition, and have it accepted by the Board, then why should I, or any of
you, want them representing us?  The channels are available to them under
the Bylaws to put forward their own petition.  Let them do so.  No one is
stopping them.  Perhaps at some point they will actually create a new
petition for presentation, although I have seen no effort on their own list
to do this.  I don't see why the GA should support their very transparent
ploy.

This is not about individuals having a voice, this effort is directed at
getting idno members seats on the Names Council.   Their website already
indicates who those NC members will be:  Joop Teernstra, Dinesh Nair, Dennis
Schaefer.

Joop's motion will be voted on this coming week.  He and I will jointly
agree on appropriate language for the ballot question as we are at odds on
this issue.  While I do not support his motion, the General Assembly will
make the decision, and I will put forward the position of the GA to the
Board.

- --
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 17:28:16 -0400
From: "babybows.com" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Stockholm

I will be in Stockholm.  It is my hope that Patrick will be there also.  

I look forward to a lively session.

Best regards,
Danny Younger

- --
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 17:08:36 -0700
From: "M. Stuart Lynn" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Travel to Stockholm

Dear Patrick (and please call me Stuart -- although in my life I've 
been called lots of other things, too!):

Peace. We are all trying to do the best job we can in moving forward, 
and it's easy for any of us to get carried away in our enthusiasm. As 
I said, I look forward to working with you, Danny and others who 
participate in the GA. We may not agree on everything, but I am sure 
we all act from what we perceive to be the best interests of the 
Internet community.

I hope you can find a way to make it to Stockholm, but if not I am 
sure I will see you at one of the future meetings.

Stuart

At 4:25 AM +1000 5/13/01, Patrick Corliss wrote:
>Dear Mr Lynn (or do you prefer Stuart?)
>
>On Sat, 12 May 2001 09:09:28 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>  Dear Patrick:
>>
>>  Please do not enlarge the problem by ascribing motives to me that
>>  have nothing to do with what is a straightforward administrative
>>  issue.
>
>Please accept my apologies if my comments were hurtful.  I am very well
>aware that you are newly appointed to the position and that I know nothing
>about you personally.  I did not mean to ascribe any motives to your
>remarks.  On reflection, one sentence, in particular, was misguided and I
>withdraw it unreservedly.
>
>>  > However, I would have thought that you would, at least, pretend to
>>  > welcome genuine grass-roots participation.
>
>I trust that you will understand this was not a well-considered remark.
>
>>  This has nothing to do with anyone's views of the GA,
>>  "concerted efforts to undermine the GA", potential Individual
>>  Constituencies, your qualifications, or whatever.
>
>It is nevertheless true that there has been a great deal of difficulty in
>achieving effective results at a grass-roots level.  I trust that we may be
>able to work together to overcome underlying structural difficulties.
>
>I mentioned my qualifications and expertise to indicate that I have the
>capacity to perform a valuable role. This opportunity would be largely lost
>were I not able to attend any of the physical meetings.  I do see that as a
>worthwhile point to balance against the administrative issues involved.
>
>>  It has nothing to
>>  do with whether or not I welcome "grass roots participation" -- in
>>  fact, I personally welcome all participation.
>
>Thank you.  I look forward to your support.
>
>>  Frankly, you know nothing of my views on any of these issues. You
>>  have never spoken with me about any of them. To be quite candid, I
>>  have not been long enough in this position to have any well-formed
>>  views on these matters. My views will ultimately be formed by
>>  listening to reasoned and constructive discussions, and by reading
>>  what people have to say -- and I will try hard not to be influenced
>>  by those who ascribe all sorts of nasty motivations to people they do
>>  not even know. I understand there are lots of people out there who
>>  have nothing better to do than engage in those kinds of behaviors,
>>  but you I know are not one of them.
>
>Thank you.  I try to be both fair and constructive.  I would value the
>opportunity to provide reasoned and constructive discussion.  As I
>say I am most disappointed that we will lose this valuable opportunity.
>
>>  This, as I said, is a straightforward administrative matter. As I
>>  understand it, ICANN's budgets are not used for covering SO expenses.
>>  This does not single out the DNSO or the GA, but applies across the
>>  all SO's. Perhaps your opinion is that this should change, and the
>  > budget should be adapted to accommodate certain kinds of SO expenses.
>  > In which case, that is a matter to be pursued through process,
>  > ultimately requiring Board approval. We cannot make exceptions on an
>>  ad hoc basis and be fair to all constituencies.
>
>Whilst I disagree with the last sentence I can understand that a desire for
>a systematic process would influence your thinking. Other factors would, in
>some cases, allow a different approach.  There is, perhaps, a danger in
>making generalised statements as they cannot cover all likely scenarios.
>
>>  My comment about expectations is equally simple. You apparently
>>  "assumed" that ICANN would cover your expenses, but never checked in
>>  advance. Apparently that approach fits within your framework of
>>  making decisions. I can tell you that it does not fit within my
>>  framework or those of most people that I know.
>
>As you know life sometimes requires muti-dimensional thinking.  I would
>prefer to view the issue as decision-making under uncertainty.  The reality
>is that I did make certain inquiries and balanced the results of those
>inquiries with other available information when making my decision.
>
>I do not consider my decision was incorrect although the absence of
>travel funding is certainly disadvantageous to achieving the most
>favourable outcome possible.  I hope that the situation can improve.
>
>>  If the acceptance of a
>>  volunteer position depended upon travel for which I have no sources
>>  of support, I would most certainly check in advance as to what is the
>>  relevant policy before agreeing to accept.
>
>I did make inquiries and received assurances which appear to be incorrect.
>It is my view, however, that ascribing me with any faulty decision-making
>behaviour is not conducive to providing a reasoned explanation of ICANN's
>administrative processes.
>
>>  My comment about no time before Stockholm was intended to mean that
>>  the chance of a grant application being made and accepted in time is
>>  extremely unlikely. If you know of any possible source for which this
>>  is not the case, I would of course be delighted to write a letter of
>>  support.
>
>My own comments had a similar intention viz that there was no opportunity to
>obtain funding from an alternative source.  I would have thought that highly
>experienced ICANN staff in your employ would be more familiar with funding
>opportunities for ICANN conferences than a newly-appointed Alternate Chair
>living far away in Australia.
>
>Nevertheless I thank you for your offer of a letter of support should this
>be required.  Sadly it looks as if it may not be a likely prospect.
>
>>  So I suggest we focus on the matter at hand and not attribute all
>>  kinds of extraneous motivations.
>
>You will find that my letter was extremely carefully written.  I clearly did
>not ascribe you with responsibility for undermining the efforts of the
>General Assembly.  In fact I did not make that ascription to anyone in
>particular.  I wrote:
>
>>  > However, it is apparent to me, at least, that there has been a concerted
>>  > effort to undermine the efforts of the General Assembly both internally
>>  > and externally.  Any proposal, such as that for the Individuals
>>  > Constituency, which has grass-roots support, is sidelined or ignored.
>>  > My expertise could be useful to draw these issues together in a
>>  > constructive way.
>
>It looks as if we got off to a bad start here.  I suggest we start over.
>
>>  I repeat what I said earlier -- I do
>>  hope you, the GA, and the DNSO can find some way for you to come to
>>  Stockholm. Maybe then we meet and get to understand each other's
>>  views better. I am sure you have a lot to offer as co-chair of the
>>  GA, -- and that is why you have been elected -- and I would look
>>  forward to working with you.
>
>I certainly appreciate your words of comfort.  I would be even more
>appreciative if you were to assist further in finding some way for me to
>come to Stockholm.  I believe I have a lot to offer as Alternate Chair (we
>try to avoid the expression "Co-Chair") of the General Assembly.
>
>More importantly I am enormously impressed by the talent, energy and
>dedication of the members of this assembly.  They are very capable and
>competent people.  I truly believe that with the proper focus, and a modicum
>of support from ICANN, the GA will achieve outstanding results.
>
>I look forward to being able to channel this energy in the right direction.
>
>>  Stuart
>
>Sincerely
>Patrick

- -- 

__________________
Stuart Lynn
President and CEO
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Tel: 310-823-9358
Fax: 310-823-8649
Email: [email-masked]
- --
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: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:07:24 +1000
From: "Dassa" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Reply to Jefsey

|> -----Original Message-----
|> On Behalf Of NameCritic
|> Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 8:08 AM
|> To: [email-masked]
|> Subject: Fw: [ga] Reply to Jefsey
|>
|>
|> Just for my own knowledge. Is the GA's job to support ICANN no matter
what?
|> Any dissenting opinion against how ICANN operates or any discussion of a
|> replacement for ICANN is considered rogue behavior and not allowed to
become
|> motions?
|>
|> just asking a question.

I think it is more to do with such discussions and motions being outside of
the scope for the GA to consider.

The GA has a limited mandate on the functions it is to perform.  Discussing
and posting motions for an ICANN replacement would certainly fall outside
of the mandate.  Discussing failures of ICANN and possible policy
improvements/initiatives would be within the mandate.

It is not a matter of supporting ICANN no matter what.  But it is a matter
of supporting ICANN in policy matters and working with ICANN for
improvement.

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: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:29:56 -0700
From: Bret Fausett <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Travel to Stockholm

One possibility for travel funding is to sell sponsorships for the General
Assembly meeting, with the proceeds going to defray Danny and Patrick's
expenses. ICANN sells sponsorships for its own meetings, and the GA could do
the same. Perhaps we could ask ICANN to offer the GA slot to potential
sponsors who ask for the opportunity to host something. We could also get
the word out on this list and other places. It maybe too late for Stockholm,
but it's something to consider for the future.

       -- Bret

- --
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:45:46 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Travel to Stockholm

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bret:

    A very good idea. What we need now is a budget for the
sponsorship.

/Bruce

- - ----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Fausett" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: May 12, 2001 20:29
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Travel to Stockholm

One possibility for travel funding is to sell sponsorships for the
General
Assembly meeting, with the proceeds going to defray Danny and
Patrick's
expenses. ICANN sells sponsorships for its own meetings, and the GA
could do
the same. Perhaps we could ask ICANN to offer the GA slot to
potential
sponsors who ask for the opportunity to host something. We could also
get
the word out on this list and other places. It maybe too late for
Stockholm,
but it's something to consider for the future.

       -- Bret

- - --
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

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBOv3nSItDk+p459CQEQJ+QACfUq0jG8AOnslyBtStKKbnSINUCYYAniph
GWfo226GSsg2+/uNkw5Atkea
=P3z2
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

- --
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 22:25:57 -0400
From: "babybows.com" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Wish List

Motions that I personally would like to see put forward:

1. The General Assembly of the DNSO resolves to ask the ICANN Board to
ensure that sufficient funding is allocated in the 2001-2002 Budget to allow
for the needs of the At-Large electoral process.
2. The General Assembly of the DNSO resolves to ask the ICANN Board for the
funding of the Secretariats of all of its Supporting Organizations.
3. The General Assembly of the DNSO resolves to ask the ICANN Board to
include all DNSO constituencies in ICANN advisory groups that now include
only some constituencies.
4. The General Assembly of the DNSO resolves to ask the Names Council to
convene a working group charged with the consideration of DNSO structural
changes (per Board resolution 01.28)

- --
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 22:57:30 -0700
From: Derek Conant <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Stockholm

I will also be in Stockholm.  It will be nice to visit Sweden.  However, it
will be interesting to see if anything productive can come from the DNSO.
Lately, I have not seen the DNSO accomplish anything that benefits the
domain name industry or ICANN, through the GA, or otherwise.  I see
participants who appear to have made the DNSO and GA only a pastime, rather
than a serious endeavor.  Why should ICANN or anyone else for that matter
fund a GA representative's trip to Stockholm?

Derek Conant
DNSGA President and Chairman

"babybows.com" wrote:

> I will be in Stockholm.  It is my hope that Patrick will be there also.
>
> I look forward to a lively session.
>
> Best regards,
> Danny Younger
>
> --
> 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: Sun, 13 May 2001 13:23:51 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  2001-2002 Budget

This is a political appreciation, I partly share.

You would be right if the DNSO is independent from the
iCANN as the funding aspects tend to show it. But the
DNSO is not an independent organization - as recently
reminded here - it is part of the global iCANN structure.

Depending on the laws and usages when a committee
Chair is not here, the Chair of the assembly this commitee
belongs to is a valid and natural interim with authority. If
the DNSO has no Chair in Stockholm, the "upper Chair"
is Vint. Also, Vint is by right Member of the GA.

This is why I say we need to decide about a legitimate
Chair for Stockholm.

Jefsey

On 22:21 12/05/01, L Gallegos said:
>Jefsey:
>
>No BoD member should chair the GA.  It would be a definite conflict,
>IMO.
>
>On 12 May 2001, at 12:47, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>
> > This is an urgent matter to address.
> >
> > Could our legal gurus advise so we may vote asap on it.
> > Otherwise we will receive a mail from Danny telling us
> > wich solution the GA has decided.
> >
> > Question: Could Vint chair the GA assembly (this would
> > put him in front of the problems)? Who is to decide: the
> > GA or the NC (I suppose the NC is the only one to be
> > able to decide of a Proxy, but the GA may suggest a name).
> >
> > Which alternate name would you want to put forward?
> >
> > Jefsey
> >
> > On 07:08 12/05/01, Joop Teernstra said:
> > >At 10:46 11/05/01 -0400, vint cerf wrote:
> > > >is there any reason to think that GA could pool limited resources to
> > > >fund a couple of representatives to attend? I know that's easy to say -
> > > >just wondering if such an idea had been considered?
> > >
> > >As it is, the chair and alt-chair are not getting any funding to attend
> > >Stockholm. How are we going to have a physical GA, this time?
> >
> > --
> > 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

- --
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: Sun, 13 May 2001 13:55:12 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Stockholm

Dear Mr. Chairman,
Most are probably glad you can eventually
make it as committed when a candidate.

IMHO we would look forward to a studious
and productive working session. The target
of the people in spending their own travel
money is to help the community, enjoy
innovation and contructive solutions
and protect their business interests.

May I suggest that "lively" is therefore
very short and inapporpriate as a meeting
agenda, even totally unprepared as this
one. From a previous personnal mail, it
seems you would have an agenda under
discussion with some individuals?

Might we know about it?

Obvsiouly everything voted in Stockholm,
should be endorsed by the online GA.

Jefsey

PS. Patrick did you evaluate the cost of
your travel you cannot cover? I think you
should get real about it. As long as you
do not say "I need $ 2787.23" no one is
going to think about how much he could
commit.

On 23:28 12/05/01, babybows.com said:
>I will be in Stockholm.  It is my hope that Patrick will be there also.
>
>I look forward to a lively session.
>
>Best regards,
>Danny Younger
>
>--
>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: Sun, 13 May 2001 23:04:20 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  Channels to create an IC

At 16:51 12/05/01 -0400, babybows.com wrote:
>My personal view...
>
With due respect, should take no priority over your duties as Chair.

>
>Make no mistake about it, if an Individuals' Constituency is created, the
>idno will be the first organization in line seeking to represent
>individuals.  If they can't get sufficiently organized to present their own
>petition, and have it accepted by the Board, then why should I, or any of
>you, want them representing us? 

This is unwarranted. We are talking about the principle of  a constituency
for Individual DN owners, voting for whoever they want to represent them. 

The Idno is not "them", it's for all who want to make it work. 

The channels are available to them under
>the Bylaws to put forward their own petition.  Let them do so.  No one is
>stopping them.  Perhaps at some point they will actually create a new
>petition for presentation, although I have seen no effort on their own list
>to do this.  I don't see why the GA should support their very transparent
>ploy.

I think with this you just stepped outside your role as elected Chair of
this Assembly.

>This is not about individuals having a voice, this effort is directed at
>getting idno members seats on the Names Council.   Their website already
>indicates who those NC members will be:  Joop Teernstra, Dinesh Nair, Dennis
>Schaefer.
>
These three people have been elected by the idno members as external
representatives of the idno.  
New elections for an IC will determine who in the end will sit on the NC. I
am not at all sure if I would want tro accept such a nomination. Perhaps
Jeff Williams (not an idno member) ,  Eric Dierker (not an idno member)
and William X Walsh will be elected. Who knows.

>Joop's motion will be voted on this coming week.  He and I will jointly
>agree on appropriate language for the ballot question as we are at odds on
>this issue. 

I didn't know we were "at odds". I trusted you enough to nominate you for
Chair, expecting that motions from GA members, if duly seconded, would be
brought to a proper vote.

Here is the language the mover of the motion proposes to the GA and the
Chair for the members to vote on:

1. The General Assembly of the DNSO hereby resolves to recommend to the ICANN
Board that it act in the interest of the Corporation and establishes the
ground rules for an Individuals' Constituency in the DNSO in this plenary
session in Stockholm. 
Agree/Disagree

(and 

1a.  The General Assembly of the DNSO hereby resolves to recommend to the
Names Council that it recommends to the ICANN Board that it act in the
interest of the Corporation and establishes the ground rules for an
Individuals' Constituency in the DNSO in this plenary session in Stockholm. 
Agree /disagree)

and

2.  The General Assembly of the DNSO hereby resolves to recommend  to the
ICANN Board that it act in the interest of the Corporation and approves in
principle the Application for  an Individuals' Constituency in the DNSO in
this plenary session in Stockholm, if and when such an application is again
presented to the Board. 
Agree /disagree

and  

2a  The General Assembly of the DNSO hereby resolves to recommend to the
Names Council that it recommends to the ICANN Board that it act in the
interest of the Corporation and approves in principle the Application for
an Individuals' Constituency in the DNSO in this plenary session in
Stockholm, if and when such an application is again presented to the Board. 
Agree /disagree

- --
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: Mon, 14 May 2001 00:45:11 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Stockholm

Hi Jefsey

On Sun, 13 May 2001 13:55:12 +0200, you wrote:

> PS. Patrick did you evaluate the cost of
> your travel you cannot cover? I think you
> should get real about it. As long as you
> do not say "I need $ 2787.23" no one is
> going to think about how much he could
> commit.

I was interested Chris McElroy and Bret Fausett suggesting solutions
such as sponsorships for the travel costs to Stockholm.  I have also had
the following private offer:

> What would be the possibility of asking for donations from the GA list
> members personally, or the companies that they are with. I'm more or less
> a "one man shop " but would be able to contribute $100.00. or $150.00 US
> to a fund to send at least 1 Representative from the DNSO GA

The Chair is coming from the US where fares are cheaper than Australia.

In my case, a local travel agent tells me that a return fare from Sydney,
Australia to Stockholm, Sweden, would be $2,300 Australian.  Apparently it's
a high season and Australia is quite far.  I do not know the current rate of
exchange but a rule of thumb is about half.  That makes US$1,150.  A pure
guess is that hotel expenses might be $100 a day.  Extras would be food,
airport taxes, shuttle bus and other such sundries.

The NC budget suggested US$4,000 but did not make the funds available.
I'm very economical and think a reasonable amount would be US $2,000.

I thank the person who offered support.  I would certainly appreciate any
sponsorship offers from registrars or other such companies.

Thank you all for your kindness
Patrick Corliss
Alternate Chair.

- --
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: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:04:23 -0500
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  2001-2002 Budget

Danny Younger has said he will be in Stockholm, so the GA chair will 
be present.

On 13 May 2001, at 13:23, Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> This is a political appreciation, I partly share.
> 
> You would be right if the DNSO is independent from the
> iCANN as the funding aspects tend to show it. But the
> DNSO is not an independent organization - as recently
> reminded here - it is part of the global iCANN structure.
> 
> Depending on the laws and usages when a committee
> Chair is not here, the Chair of the assembly this commitee
> belongs to is a valid and natural interim with authority. If
> the DNSO has no Chair in Stockholm, the "upper Chair"
> is Vint. Also, Vint is by right Member of the GA.
> 
> This is why I say we need to decide about a legitimate
> Chair for Stockholm.
> 
> Jefsey
> 
> 
> On 22:21 12/05/01, L Gallegos said:
> >Jefsey:
> >
> >No BoD member should chair the GA.  It would be a definite conflict,
> >IMO.
> >
> >On 12 May 2001, at 12:47, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >
> > > This is an urgent matter to address.
> > >
> > > Could our legal gurus advise so we may vote asap on it.
> > > Otherwise we will receive a mail from Danny telling us
> > > wich solution the GA has decided.
> > >
> > > Question: Could Vint chair the GA assembly (this would
> > > put him in front of the problems)? Who is to decide: the
> > > GA or the NC (I suppose the NC is the only one to be
> > > able to decide of a Proxy, but the GA may suggest a name).
> > >
> > > Which alternate name would you want to put forward?
> > >
> > > Jefsey
> > >
> > > On 07:08 12/05/01, Joop Teernstra said:
> > > >At 10:46 11/05/01 -0400, vint cerf wrote:
> > > > >is there any reason to think that GA could pool limited resources to
> > > > >fund a couple of representatives to attend? I know that's easy to
> > > > >say - just wondering if such an idea had been considered?
> > > >
> > > >As it is, the chair and alt-chair are not getting any funding to
> > > >attend Stockholm. How are we going to have a physical GA, this time?
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> 
> --
> 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: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:26:29 -0700
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [Fwd: [ga-ext] Re:  2001-2002 Budget]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------4CE1D7AE063EE529239B8B1D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

(This is "forwarded" because I now find that in responding to
the babybows.com email I had inadvertently hit "Reply"
rather than "Reply All.")

- --------------4CE1D7AE063EE529239B8B1D
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 21:28:53 -0700
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "babybows.com" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga-ext] Re:  2001-2002 Budget
References: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"babybows.com" wrote:

> "This is a draft that crept out, the way things creep out," said Stuart
> Lynn, chief executive of ICANN. "The proposed budget is not being posted
> yet. It's a working draft of a committee that we've been working on for four
> months...Someone let it out, and of course everybody gets all involved with
> it. It's kind of premature."
> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-5902622.html?tag=lh

>From the article just cited:
______
The preliminary budget was posted last week to a restricted mailing list
for accredited registrars of the Domain Name Supporting Organization
(DNSO). The DNSO advises the ICANN's board on policy issues
relating to the domain name system.
______

And this from the Bylaws:
______
ARTICLE III: TRANSPARENCY AND PROCEDURES

    Section 1. GENERAL

    The Corporation and its subordinate entities shall operate to the
maximum extent feasible in an open and transparent manner and
consistent with procedures designed to ensure fairness.
_______

How are these two to be reconciled?  The use of a  "working draft"
can easily be understood with respect to those working on a budget,
but how is it that only "accredited registrars" have any input on the
budget?

The "Finance Committee" responsible for budget preparation was
formed by the Resolution shown at
http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-13dec00.htm
and lists its members as follows:

" . . . that Linda Wilson be, and hereby is, appointed chair of the
Finance Committee, and that  Jonathan Cohen, Helmut Schink, and
Ivan Moura Campos are appointed members of the Finance Committee."

What the Bylaws say about preparing the budget is this:

______
Section 6. CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

The Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") shall be the chief financial officer
of the Corporation. If required by the Board, the CFO shall give a
bond for the faithful discharge of his or her duties in such form and with
such surety or sureties as the Board shall determine. The CFO shall
have charge and custody of all the funds of the Corporation and shall
keep or cause to be kept, in books belonging to the Corporation, full
and accurate amounts of all receipts and disbursements, and shall deposit
all money and other valuable effects in the name of the Corporation in
such depositories as may be designated for that purpose by the Board.
The CFO shall disburse the funds of the Corporation as may be ordered
by the Board or the President and, whenever requested by them, shall
deliver to the Board and the President an account of all his or her
transactions as CFO and of the financial condition of the Corporation.
The CFO shall be responsible for the Corporation's financial planning
and forecasting and shall assist the President in the preparation of the
Corporation's annual budget. The CFO shall coordinate and oversee
the Corporation's funding, including any audits or other reviews of the
Corporation or its Supporting Organizations. The CFO shall be
responsible for all other matters relating to the financial operation of the
Corporation.
______

And Article XI describes the preparation of the budget as follows:
______
Section 4. ANNUAL BUDGET

The President shall prepare and, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the
commencement of each fiscal year, submit to the Board, a proposed
annual budget of the Corporation for the next fiscal year. The proposed
budget shall identify anticipated revenue sources and levels and shall, to
the extent practical, identify anticipated material expense items by line
item. The Board shall adopt an annual budget and shall publish the
adopted Budget on the Web Site.
______

Since the dollars drive the action, it would appear just from this comparison
that the "accredited registrars" run ICANN.  Wherein would this conclusion
be incorrect?  Perhaps one or more of the above listed members of the
Finance Committee would like to explain all of this to the rest of us, pursuant
to the above-cited Article III, Section 1, of the Bylaws.  I don't think that
provision means that things will be posted only after they are a done deal.

Bill Lovell

- --------------4CE1D7AE063EE529239B8B1D--

- --
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 #454
************************