Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #669
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Tuesday, August 14 2001           Volume 01 : Number 669

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

Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:03:38 -0400
From: "Milton Mueller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Peter:
The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999. 
An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
powers that be just didn't like the people behind it. 
Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes 
before the NC that it will be treated less politically?

>>> "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]> 08/07/01 09:19AM >>>
Greetings:
 
Please refer to Article 3, and section 3 (d) of the ICANN bylaws at
http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI 
 
The (proposed) new constituency must self-organize, probably produce a
document containing at least a statement of purpose, or mission
statement, and some basic bylaws defining membership.
 
Once the (proposed) new constituency has self-organized, it may petition
the Board for recognition.
 
My question is, has such self-organization, and production of documents
taken place?
 
Peter de Blanc
 
(Please note that I support the idea of some kind of individual domain
name holder's constituency)

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Philip
Sheppard
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:21 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked] 
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked] 
Subject: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Danny, 
thank you for your reply to my request for a document summarising the
rationale and level of support for an individual's constituency. I can
understand your temptation in continuing to copy in the entire NC but
would urge you to stop unless those individuals actively ask to be kept
directly informed. A copy to nc-review would seem more appropriate.
 
You cited general references to the CONCEPT in the report of WG review
with which I am familiar. You also cite a proposal on the CONCEPT made
by Karl Auerbach. Did this ever get to a vote? You also cite various
votes to questions of CONCEPT in each case with votes cast numbering
from around 20 to 90 persons.
 
What would be useful is to know if there has been a SUBSTANTIVE proposal
addressing the key issue of representation, and if so what level of
support that proposal received.
 
Philip

- --
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, 13 Aug 2001 11:28:41 -0700
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Denying a proposal because one doesn't like the people supporting it is not
politics of any honorable variety. It is slimey, subjective, and personal.
It also doesn't serve the best interests of the ICANN, in the long run.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 10:04 AM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request
> 
> 
> Peter:
> The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999. 
> An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
> powers that be just didn't like the people behind it. 
> Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes 
> before the NC that it will be treated less politically?
> 
> >>> "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]> 08/07/01 09:19AM >>>
> Greetings:
>  
> Please refer to Article 3, and section 3 (d) of the ICANN bylaws at
> http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI 
>  
> The (proposed) new constituency must self-organize, probably produce a
> document containing at least a statement of purpose, or mission
> statement, and some basic bylaws defining membership.
>  
> Once the (proposed) new constituency has self-organized, it 
> may petition
> the Board for recognition.
>  
> My question is, has such self-organization, and production of 
> documents
> taken place?
>  
> Peter de Blanc
>  
> (Please note that I support the idea of some kind of individual domain
> name holder's constituency)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Philip
> Sheppard
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:21 AM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked] 
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked] 
> Subject: [ga] Re: Documentation request
> 
> 
> Danny, 
> thank you for your reply to my request for a document summarising the
> rationale and level of support for an individual's constituency. I can
> understand your temptation in continuing to copy in the entire NC but
> would urge you to stop unless those individuals actively ask 
> to be kept
> directly informed. A copy to nc-review would seem more appropriate.
>  
> You cited general references to the CONCEPT in the report of WG review
> with which I am familiar. You also cite a proposal on the CONCEPT made
> by Karl Auerbach. Did this ever get to a vote? You also cite various
> votes to questions of CONCEPT in each case with votes cast numbering
> from around 20 to 90 persons.
>  
> What would be useful is to know if there has been a 
> SUBSTANTIVE proposal
> addressing the key issue of representation, and if so what level of
> support that proposal received.
>  
> Philip
>  
>  
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:47:43 +0200
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Reminder: ALSC Meeting Webcast Today

Just a quick reminder that the ICANN At Large Study
Committee outreach meeting starts in four hours!
http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml

Best regards,
/// Alexander

Some local time info:
Anchorage            --  Monday, 13 August 2001 15:00-19:00h
L.A./Mexico City     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 16:00-20:00h
Denver/San Salvador  --  Monday, 13 August 2001 17:00-21:00h
Chicago/Lima         --  Monday, 13 August 2001 18:00-22:00h
New York/Caracas     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 19:00-23:00h
Halifax/Montevideo   --  Monday, 13 August 2001 20:00-24:00h
London/Algiers       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00-04:00h
Paris/Cape Town      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 01:00-05:00h
Athens/Cairo/Nairobi -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 02:00-06:00h
Moscow/Teheran       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 03:00-07:00h
Tashkent             -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:00-08:00h
New Delhi            -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:30-08:30h
Dhaka                -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 05:00-09:00h
Bangkok/Hanoi        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 06:00-10:00h
Beijing/Perth        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 07:00-11:00h
Tokyo/Seoul          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 08:00-12:00h
Melbourne/Sydney     -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 09:00-13:00h
Vladivostok          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 10:00-14:00h
Wellington/Suva      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 11:00-15:00h

___ forwarded message: ______________________________________________________

   From: [email-masked] (Denise Michel)
   Date: 09.08.01, 11:07:25
Subject: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach Meeting

The ALSC invites all interested individuals (with the requisite Internet
access/tools*) who are unable to attend in person to listen to our August 13
outreach meeting on the Internet in real-time.  Instructions to access the
meeting:

AUDIO STREAMING ACCESS INFORMATION:

1. Establish your Internet connection (August 13, no earlier than 15:45
Pacific Time).
2. Launch (start) your Internet browser (make sure your security level is
set to "medium" or lower) .
3. Go to http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com
4. Click on "Attend a Webcast" (in the column on the right).
5. From the "Audio Streaming/Replay" menu, select "Leader/Participant Join".
6. Enter the "Conference ID"  8068204; enter the "Conference Passcode"
ICANN; enter "participant information" (your name and email address**), and
click on "Proceed"

*See:  http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com/webcast/requirements.php3
**This information will be reviewed by the ALSC to help determine the
utility of audio streaming for future meetings, and will then be destroyed.

If you have statements/questions to share during the outreach meeting,
please email them to our on-line forum at
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum.shtml with "Aug. 13 Outreach Meeting
Comment" in the subject line.  We will attempt to include your comment in
the meeting.

The meeting agenda and other information is available at
http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml

Denise Michel
Executive Director
At Large Study Committee
[email-masked]
Denise Michel
Executive Director
At Large Study Committee
[email-masked]

___ end of forwarded message ________________________________________________

- --
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, 13 Aug 2001 19:13:34 +0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Milton Mueller wrote:
>
>Peter:
>The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999.
>An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
>powers that be just didn't like the people behind it.
>Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes
>before the NC that it will be treated less politically?
>

I don't know about "the powers that be", but speaking for myself I don't 
have problems with the "people" behind the proposal as individuals, but with 
their lack of representativity of the population they claim to speak for, 
together with the lack of capability to aggregate new forces and new 
subjects.
You rightfully mention that the proposal has been floating around for 2+ 
years, and in fact the numbers behind it have not grown substantially.

Until we are not able to present a proposal that can have the support of a 
substantially higher population (by involving consumer organizations, user 
groups, other individuals) "the powers that be" will have at least a good 
excuse for not recognizing the constituency.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

- --
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, 14 Aug 2001 07:30:23 +1200
From: DPF <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Documentation request

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:13:34 +0000, "Roberto Gaetano"
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>I don't know about "the powers that be", but speaking for myself I don't 
>have problems with the "people" behind the proposal as individuals, but with 
>their lack of representativity of the population they claim to speak for, 
>together with the lack of capability to aggregate new forces and new 
>subjects.
>You rightfully mention that the proposal has been floating around for 2+ 
>years, and in fact the numbers behind it have not grown substantially.
>
>Until we are not able to present a proposal that can have the support of a 
>substantially higher population (by involving consumer organizations, user 
>groups, other individuals) "the powers that be" will have at least a good 
>excuse for not recognizing the constituency.

There is a chicken and an egg situation here.  Because previous
efforts have been so futile many people have given up and there is
little capacity to attract people and resources.

However if approval in principle was given to a constituency along
with agreement on the basic structure then that would be a different
matter.  

The approval in principle could be done so that no voting rights
accrue to the constituency until it has say 500 or 1,000 members.  But
with that knowledge that once we get that many we will be recognised,
I am very confident that is achievable.

Don't you see the self fulfilling prophecy of the status quo that
applications are doomed to fail because not enough people are involved
and not enough people are involved because the applications are doomed
to fail?

The way to break the cycle is through a three step process IMO

1) Acceptance that there is no reason individual registrants should be
barred from voting rights in the DNSO by having no constituency

2) Approval of some key aspects of a registrants constituency such as
membership eligibility, minimum size, regional variation, funding etc

3) Then once that approval is given the actual constituency self forms
and a final proposal is submitted to the Board.

As I say though (3) will not happen without (2) and (1).  

DPF
- --
[email-masked]
ICQ 29964527
- --
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, 13 Aug 2001 14:42:35 -0700
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Also, the ICANN will probably not consider a public consensus valid.

Their behavior shows they have never achieved this nor do they act as if it 
is an acceptable way to do business.

We need to develop a strong solution and sell it directly to the US 
Congress so they can force the ICANN to do their job.

:)

~k

At 07:13 PM 8/13/2001 +0000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>Milton Mueller wrote:
>>
>>Peter:
>>The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999.
>>An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
>>powers that be just didn't like the people behind it.
>>Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes
>>before the NC that it will be treated less politically?
>
>I don't know about "the powers that be", but speaking for myself I don't 
>have problems with the "people" behind the proposal as individuals, but 
>with their lack of representativity of the population they claim to speak 
>for, together with the lack of capability to aggregate new forces and new 
>subjects.
>You rightfully mention that the proposal has been floating around for 2+ 
>years, and in fact the numbers behind it have not grown substantially.
>
>Until we are not able to present a proposal that can have the support of a 
>substantially higher population (by involving consumer organizations, user 
>groups, other individuals) "the powers that be" will have at least a good 
>excuse for not recognizing the constituency.
>
>Regards
>Roberto
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>--
>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: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:05:57 -0400
From: "Milton Mueller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

But this is precisely the futile game that has been played before. 

Other DNSO constituencies consist of a tiny number of groups,
none of which are broadly "representative" of the groups they
symbolically claim. There are, for example, millions of businesses,
large and small, but mostly less than 10, perhaps a maximum of 15
organizations are active in the B&C constituency. Just to avoid 
any recriminations, let me hasten to add that the same is 
true of NCDNHC. There are millions of noncommercial entities in
the world, but only about 30 organizations are routinely active
in DNSO. There are millions of trademark holders, but the same set of
individuals representing a few major lobbying gfroups are active
in IPCC. The simple fact is that domain names, at $35/year or less,
don't enter the radar screens of too many people.

Who is to determine who "represents" individuals? You, Roberto?
A group of Board members, 4 of whom were never elected by 
anybody, 9 of whom were elected with grand totals of 5 votes, 
10 votes? 

What you are telling me is precisely that such subjective and 
highly politicized criteria will indeed be applied again. Now why
should anyone go to the enormous trouble to organize a
constituency knowing that? 

- --MM

>>> "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]> 08/13/01 03:13PM >>>
Milton Mueller wrote:
>
>Peter:
>The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999.
>An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
>powers that be just didn't like the people behind it.
>Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes
>before the NC that it will be treated less politically?
>

I don't know about "the powers that be", but speaking for myself I don't 
have problems with the "people" behind the proposal as individuals, but with 
their lack of representativity of the population they claim to speak for, 
together with the lack of capability to aggregate new forces and new 
subjects.
You rightfully mention that the proposal has been floating around for 2+ 
years, and in fact the numbers behind it have not grown substantially.

Until we are not able to present a proposal that can have the support of a 
substantially higher population (by involving consumer organizations, user 
groups, other individuals) "the powers that be" will have at least a good 
excuse for not recognizing the constituency.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp 

- --
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, 13 Aug 2001 19:12:25 -0400
From: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Milton, I never had any problem with "the people". I was not on the
Names Council in 199, but I have attended most meetings, and I
particularly remember that in santiago chile, Joop was the focus of many
go-arounds in the GA. (nii quaynor chaired that meeting).

If and when a set of documents to form the idho, or whatever it evolves
to be called, with aa significant number of persons and organizations
signing off on it (more than 100)

I would endorse it for presentation to the ICANN board.

Peter de Blanc

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Milton
Mueller
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 1:04 PM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Peter:
The self-organization took place back in Spring 1999. 
An IDNO organization has been around since then, the
powers that be just didn't like the people behind it. 
Can we agree that when _another_ such proposal comes 
before the NC that it will be treated less politically?

>>> "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]> 08/07/01 09:19AM >>>
Greetings:
 
Please refer to Article 3, and section 3 (d) of the ICANN bylaws at
http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI 
 
The (proposed) new constituency must self-organize, probably produce a
document containing at least a statement of purpose, or mission
statement, and some basic bylaws defining membership.
 
Once the (proposed) new constituency has self-organized, it may petition
the Board for recognition.
 
My question is, has such self-organization, and production of documents
taken place?
 
Peter de Blanc
 
(Please note that I support the idea of some kind of individual domain
name holder's constituency)

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Philip
Sheppard
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:21 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked] 
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked] 
Subject: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Danny, 
thank you for your reply to my request for a document summarising the
rationale and level of support for an individual's constituency. I can
understand your temptation in continuing to copy in the entire NC but
would urge you to stop unless those individuals actively ask to be kept
directly informed. A copy to nc-review would seem more appropriate.
 
You cited general references to the CONCEPT in the report of WG review
with which I am familiar. You also cite a proposal on the CONCEPT made
by Karl Auerbach. Did this ever get to a vote? You also cite various
votes to questions of CONCEPT in each case with votes cast numbering
from around 20 to 90 persons.
 
What would be useful is to know if there has been a SUBSTANTIVE proposal
addressing the key issue of representation, and if so what level of
support that proposal received.
 
Philip

- --
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: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:28:26 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reminder: ALSC Meeting Webcast Today

Well, so much for the webcast.  Could not get to the login.  
Shades of registering as an at-large member.

On 13 Aug 2001, at 20:47, Alexander Svensson wrote:

> 
> Just a quick reminder that the ICANN At Large Study
> Committee outreach meeting starts in four hours!
> http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml
> 
> Best regards,
> /// Alexander
> 
> Some local time info:
> Anchorage            --  Monday, 13 August 2001 15:00-19:00h
> L.A./Mexico City     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 16:00-20:00h
> Denver/San Salvador  --  Monday, 13 August 2001 17:00-21:00h
> Chicago/Lima         --  Monday, 13 August 2001 18:00-22:00h
> New York/Caracas     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 19:00-23:00h
> Halifax/Montevideo   --  Monday, 13 August 2001 20:00-24:00h
> London/Algiers       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00-04:00h
> Paris/Cape Town      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 01:00-05:00h
> Athens/Cairo/Nairobi -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 02:00-06:00h
> Moscow/Teheran       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 03:00-07:00h
> Tashkent             -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:00-08:00h
> New Delhi            -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:30-08:30h
> Dhaka                -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 05:00-09:00h
> Bangkok/Hanoi        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 06:00-10:00h
> Beijing/Perth        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 07:00-11:00h
> Tokyo/Seoul          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 08:00-12:00h
> Melbourne/Sydney     -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 09:00-13:00h
> Vladivostok          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 10:00-14:00h
> Wellington/Suva      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 11:00-15:00h
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___ forwarded message:
> ______________________________________________________
> 
>    From: [email-masked] (Denise Michel)
>    Date: 09.08.01, 11:07:25
> Subject: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach
> Meeting
> 
> 
> The ALSC invites all interested individuals (with the requisite
> Internet access/tools*) who are unable to attend in person to listen
> to our August 13 outreach meeting on the Internet in real-time. 
> Instructions to access the meeting:
> 
> AUDIO STREAMING ACCESS INFORMATION:
> 
> 1. Establish your Internet connection (August 13, no earlier than
> 15:45 Pacific Time). 2. Launch (start) your Internet browser (make
> sure your security level is set to "medium" or lower) . 3. Go to
> http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com 4. Click on "Attend a Webcast" (in the
> column on the right). 5. From the "Audio Streaming/Replay" menu,
> select "Leader/Participant Join". 6. Enter the "Conference ID" 
> 8068204; enter the "Conference Passcode" ICANN; enter "participant
> information" (your name and email address**), and click on "Proceed"
> 
> *See:  http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com/webcast/requirements.php3
> **This information will be reviewed by the ALSC to help determine the
> utility of audio streaming for future meetings, and will then be
> destroyed.
> 
> If you have statements/questions to share during the outreach meeting,
> please email them to our on-line forum at
> http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum.shtml with "Aug. 13 Outreach Meeting
> Comment" in the subject line.  We will attempt to include your comment
> in the meeting.
> 
> The meeting agenda and other information is available at
> http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml
> 
> 
> Denise Michel
> Executive Director
> At Large Study Committee
> [email-masked]
> Denise Michel
> Executive Director
> At Large Study Committee
> [email-masked]
> 
> ___ end of forwarded message
> ________________________________________________
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:20:41 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Documentation request

on 8/13/01 7:12 PM, Peter de Blanc at [email-masked] wrote:

> If and when a set of documents to form the idho, or whatever it evolves
> to be called, with aa significant number of persons and organizations
> signing off on it (more than 100)
> 
> I would endorse it for presentation to the ICANN board.
> 
> Peter de Blanc

Peter,

Using Best Practices, the documents you have collected so far (and other
that may be forthcoming) could be regarded as Suggestions that can, through
Discussion, be Recognized as a Basis for a Proposal, which in turn can be
Debated and Recognized as a Motion, which in turn can be Debated and
Recognized as a Basis for a Voting procedure of the DNSO General Assembly,
which currently has over 400 members to Vote (aka Sign Off) on one or more
sets of documents. The challenge of 100 would be acceptable in my opinion,
and hopefully more will be present themselves.

Problem. We understand that no formal DNSO Voting Procedures will be made
available to the GA until after Montevideo. Would you be willing to endorse
a Recognition by the GA Chair, which would in the normal course of events,
be deemed a Basis for a Vote? The GA Chair's Recognition would arise from
the procedures described in the Best Practices, culminating in a Poll, that
may accept one or more of the original, amended, or substitute Motions.

Regards,
Joanna 

 

- --
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, 13 Aug 2001 20:24:03 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reminder: ALSC Meeting Webcast Today

Me too.

Joanna

on 8/13/01 7:28 PM, L Gallegos at [email-masked] wrote:

> Well, so much for the webcast.  Could not get to the login.
> Shades of registering as an at-large member.
> 
> On 13 Aug 2001, at 20:47, Alexander Svensson wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Just a quick reminder that the ICANN At Large Study
>> Committee outreach meeting starts in four hours!
>> http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> /// Alexander
>> 
>> Some local time info:
>> Anchorage            --  Monday, 13 August 2001 15:00-19:00h
>> L.A./Mexico City     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 16:00-20:00h
>> Denver/San Salvador  --  Monday, 13 August 2001 17:00-21:00h
>> Chicago/Lima         --  Monday, 13 August 2001 18:00-22:00h
>> New York/Caracas     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 19:00-23:00h
>> Halifax/Montevideo   --  Monday, 13 August 2001 20:00-24:00h
>> London/Algiers       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00-04:00h
>> Paris/Cape Town      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 01:00-05:00h
>> Athens/Cairo/Nairobi -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 02:00-06:00h
>> Moscow/Teheran       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 03:00-07:00h
>> Tashkent             -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:00-08:00h
>> New Delhi            -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:30-08:30h
>> Dhaka                -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 05:00-09:00h
>> Bangkok/Hanoi        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 06:00-10:00h
>> Beijing/Perth        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 07:00-11:00h
>> Tokyo/Seoul          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 08:00-12:00h
>> Melbourne/Sydney     -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 09:00-13:00h
>> Vladivostok          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 10:00-14:00h
>> Wellington/Suva      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 11:00-15:00h
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___ forwarded message:
>> ______________________________________________________
>> 
>> From: [email-masked] (Denise Michel)
>> Date: 09.08.01, 11:07:25
>> Subject: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach
>> Meeting
>> 
>> 
>> The ALSC invites all interested individuals (with the requisite
>> Internet access/tools*) who are unable to attend in person to listen
>> to our August 13 outreach meeting on the Internet in real-time.
>> Instructions to access the meeting:
>> 
>> AUDIO STREAMING ACCESS INFORMATION:
>> 
>> 1. Establish your Internet connection (August 13, no earlier than
>> 15:45 Pacific Time). 2. Launch (start) your Internet browser (make
>> sure your security level is set to "medium" or lower) . 3. Go to
>> http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com 4. Click on "Attend a Webcast" (in the
>> column on the right). 5. From the "Audio Streaming/Replay" menu,
>> select "Leader/Participant Join". 6. Enter the "Conference ID"
>> 8068204; enter the "Conference Passcode" ICANN; enter "participant
>> information" (your name and email address**), and click on "Proceed"
>> 
>> *See:  http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com/webcast/requirements.php3
>> **This information will be reviewed by the ALSC to help determine the
>> utility of audio streaming for future meetings, and will then be
>> destroyed.
>> 
>> If you have statements/questions to share during the outreach meeting,
>> please email them to our on-line forum at
>> http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum.shtml with "Aug. 13 Outreach Meeting
>> Comment" in the subject line.  We will attempt to include your comment
>> in the meeting.
>> 
>> The meeting agenda and other information is available at
>> http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml
>> 
>> 
>> Denise Michel
>> Executive Director
>> At Large Study Committee
>> [email-masked]
>> Denise Michel
>> Executive Director
>> At Large Study Committee
>> [email-masked]
>> 
>> ___ end of forwarded message
>> ________________________________________________
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 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: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:43:32 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FW: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach Meeting

FYI. If Bret sent this to the GA list, apologies, but I don't see it.
Conference on a 15 minute break at time of posting.

Regards,
Joanna
- ----------
From: Bret Fausett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:01:37 -0700
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: Denise Michel <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach Meeting
Resent-From: [email-masked]
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:02:15 -0400

Worldcom reports that the webcast is not working, but you can call in and
listen over the telephone. The toll-free number in the U.S. is 888-942-8131.
Use the password "ICANN." There may be numbers for those outside the U.S. as
well. Call Worldcom customer service at the number closest to you. I found
five numbers here: http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com/contactus.php3

     -- 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: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:13:02 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Monday, Monday, August 13, 2001, 5:20:41 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:

> on 8/13/01 7:12 PM, Peter de Blanc at [email-masked] wrote:

>> If and when a set of documents to form the idho, or whatever it evolves
>> to be called, with aa significant number of persons and organizations
>> signing off on it (more than 100)
>> 
>> I would endorse it for presentation to the ICANN board.
>> 
>> Peter de Blanc

> Peter,

> Using Best Practices

You mean your draft of your opinion of what Best Practices may be.

Let's be clear that your drafts are merely your own suggestions for
procedures, but in fact are not the procedures of the GA, and as such
have no relevance.

Since this is a discussion of rules, hasn't this subject been declared
verboten by our alt-chair (who has been conspicuously absent of late)?

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

- --
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 #669
************************