Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #952
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Friday, January 4 2002           Volume 01 : Number 952

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

Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:41:42 -0800 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Ciao!

As promised, I'm outta here. The unsub message follows this one. Between
this list and the ALSC list, I can't decide which is a larger waste of
bandwidth. I'll stay a voting member, just to keep an eye out. But, I'm
definitely leaving this list.

It doesn't matter what the GA does, it doesn't have a vote and negotiating
with the ICANN BoD is simply a runaround. You simply can't negotiate with a
dishonest organization. The power clique that formed the ICANN will only
relinquish control when you pry it from their cold dead fingers. The minute
it looks like you're even getting close, they'll move the goal-posts, as
they have a dozen times already.

See you all elsewhere and I wish you luck. But, people in hell will get
ice-water long before the ICANN gives either the GA or the ALSO a vote.
They've even slammed the door on one of their own (Auerbach). It's time to
take this fight to another venue. One that they can't control.

- --
R O E L A N D  M J  M E Y E R
Managing Director
Morgan Hill Software Company
tel: +1 925 373 3954
cel: +1 925 352 3615
fax: +1 925 373 9781 
http://www.mhsc.com
- --
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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:59:14 +1100
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Ciao!

On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:41:42 -0800, Roeland Meyer wrote:

> It doesn't matter what the GA does, it doesn't have a vote and negotiating
> with the ICANN BoD is simply a runaround. You simply can't negotiate with a
> dishonest organization. The power clique that formed the ICANN will only
> relinquish control when you pry it from their cold dead fingers. The minute
> it looks like you're even getting close, they'll move the goal-posts, as
> they have a dozen times already.

Hi Roeland

I agree that the fight looks like a lost cause but I'll hold out for a while
longer.  Thank you for all of your efforts - you have been an inspiration to
us all !!

I'm also sorry that my own project has been side-lined by the dotcom collapse
and my own personal difficulties.  I really would have liked to worked towards
building a business relationship with you and your company.  That also seems
unlikely at this time.

But you never know what will happen in this wide world.

So best wishes and keep in touch  :-)

Regards
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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 20:04:00 +1100
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE:  [ga] CONCERNS

On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:15:03 -0800, William X Walsh wrote:

> Your specificallity in making proposals is truly excellent, Eric.
>
> (Sarcasm intended)

Hi William

Interestingly, Eric is quite oblivious to the deeper undercurrents.

I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of 2002.

Best regards for the New Year
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: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 14:04:42 +0100
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] CONCERNS

Patrick Corliss wrote:

>
>I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of 
>2002.
>

Fairly possible.
At time of writing, few hours before the closure of the endorsment period, 
none of the candidates has passed the 10 ballots threshold.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

- --
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: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:55:20 -0500
From: Dan Steinberg <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONCERNS

FYI,  I don't know if it applies to anyone else but I have received no mail
from [email-masked] for balloting. This may explain the lack of voting.  Has
anyone else experience this, either for the GA or TF elections?

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Patrick Corliss wrote:
>
> >
> >I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of
> >2002.
> >
>
> Fairly possible.
> At time of writing, few hours before the closure of the endorsment period,
> none of the candidates has passed the 10 ballots threshold.
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
> --
> 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

- --
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:[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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:03:33 -0500
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONCERNS

You might want to recount - as of your writing, each, but Eric does. (unless
somehow I've miscounted, which is completely possible.)

- -rwr
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 8:04 AM
Subject: RE: [ga] CONCERNS

> Patrick Corliss wrote:
>
> >
> >I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of
> >2002.
> >
>
> Fairly possible.
> At time of writing, few hours before the closure of the endorsment period,
> none of the candidates has passed the 10 ballots threshold.
>
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
> --
> 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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:17:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonathan Weinberg <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONCERNS

	The last couple of endorsements for each of the candidates
(thankfully) came in after Roberto posted his message.

Jon

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

> You might want to recount - as of your writing, each, but Eric does. (unless
> somehow I've miscounted, which is completely possible.)
> 
> -rwr
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 8:04 AM
> Subject: RE: [ga] CONCERNS
> 
> 
> > Patrick Corliss wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of
> > >2002.
> > >
> >
> > Fairly possible.
> > At time of writing, few hours before the closure of the endorsment period,
> > none of the candidates has passed the 10 ballots threshold.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Roberto
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >
> > --
> > 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
> 

Jonathan Weinberg
[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: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 15:30:37 +0100
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONCERNS

Ross,

You wrote:
>Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:03:33 -0500
>
>You might want to recount - as of your writing, each, but Eric does.

Thanks for the interest in the matter.
As of *your* writing, 09:03:33 EST, three candidates are OK, but you might 
want to notice that the last 5 endorsements came between 14:36 and 14:48 
CET, i.e. more than 1/2 hour *after* my message (14:04:42 CET).

Anyway, the minimum is done, but it would be nice if more enthusiasm could 
be shown in supporting our candidates: the number of endorsements will 
remain as public record.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

- --
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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:59:09 -0500
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONCERNS

> Thanks for the interest in the matter.
> As of *your* writing, 09:03:33 EST, three candidates are OK, but you might
> want to notice that the last 5 endorsements came between 14:36 and 14:48
> CET, i.e. more than 1/2 hour *after* my message (14:04:42 CET).

;) I meant as of *my* writing. Yet another reason not to rush through email
between coffee and shower on the way out of the house...

>
> Anyway, the minimum is done, but it would be nice if more enthusiasm could
> be shown in supporting our candidates: the number of endorsements will
> remain as public record.

Agreed.

- -rwr

- --
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: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:00:02 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga]Negative versus perseverance.

Assembly members,

Don't believe this interesting movement and do not worry about the Cairo.

All four candidates are appropriately endorsed and you have real choices for
election.

You have people to chose from as diverse as Thomas and Myself and
you have main liner middle of the roared like Alexander and Kristen.

I personally can afford to be a chair.  But I would rather spend more time on
such matters as soccer, surfing, skiing, hiking, reading and finding my next
soul mate.  But this here is a real election that legitimizes the GA if you turn
out and vote.  Even if Thomas is elected I will bust elbows to get the outreach
and funding we need to get the job done.

But you have to turn out and vote or nothing new will happen.

I went back and looked and the endorsements are far better this year than last.

Let me do it to you one more time;

I got children from middle school through college, I got taxi drivers from Hong
Kong
to Paris with Dallas in between.  I got shoe shine boys from Saigon to Seattle to
the
Ukraine.  With love and luck I will create information Internet centers in
Afghanistan.
South America is exploding with our IT age, Africa will win the world as they care
and
need it.

THE GA ANN'S DEAD IT IS BARELY OUT OF THE WOMB.

I sincerely call on all who read my words to jump up and contribute.

Sincerely,
Eric

Patrick Corollas wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:15:03 -0800, William X Walsh wrote:
>
> > Your specificallity in making proposals is truly excellent, Eric.
> >
> > (Sarcasm intended)
>
> Hi William
>
> Interestingly, Eric is quite oblivious to the deeper undercurrents.
>
> I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of 2002.
>
> Best regards for the New Year
> 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

- --
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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:42:27 -0500
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONCERNS

I received my ballot and voted.

On 4 Jan 2002, at 8:55, Dan Steinberg wrote:

> FYI,  I don't know if it applies to anyone else but I have received no mail
> from [email-masked] for balloting. This may explain the lack of voting. 
> Has anyone else experience this, either for the GA or TF elections?
> 
> Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> 
> > Patrick Corliss wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >I forecast that the General Assembly will be disbanded before the end of
> > >2002.
> > >
> >
> > Fairly possible.
> > At time of writing, few hours before the closure of the endorsment
> > period, none of the candidates has passed the 10 ballots threshold.
> >
> > Regards
> > Roberto
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >
> > --
> > 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
> 
> --
> Dan Steinberg
> 
> SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
> 35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
> Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
> J9B 1N1                 e-mail:[email-masked]
> 
> 
> --
> 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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:47:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Rick H Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] VGRS Wait List

Registrants may be interested in this note on cnet

http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8360613.html?tag=pt.msnbc.feed..ne_8360613

- -rick

- --
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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:48:37 +0100 (CET)
From: Marc Schneiders <[email-masked]>
Subject: Comment please: .ORG task force (Re: [ga] .ORG Divestiture Task Force v. 5.2)

[Jeff was trying to outwit me by posting this text :-)]

As it was unclear (and still is) whether this is the final version, but
since it was posted for comment to the NCDNHC list not long ago, I think I
should present it to you all in the GA now, as your representative in the
task force that wrote the draft.  Yesterday night the task force had a
teleconference, which proved to be quite productive in solving remaining
issues, but not everything is fully final now (quite apart from the need
of adoption of the text by the Names Council etc.).

The most important issues for me, as your representative, which I put in
my statement accepting to be on this task force, were (and still) are:

* no domains already registered cancelled ('grandfathering');
* a positive approach to diversify TLDs, meaning that in some way ORG
should be mainly or basically a non-commercial (individual, community
etc.) TLD, not a duplicate of COM;
* a policy for ORG that really works (checking all registrations is really
impossible and/or too expensive)
* registrants' influence (preferably via elections, if possible) on the
management

I think all of these points are quite well represented in the text. I am
happy with it, even if it is a compromise.

If any on the GA list has comments, please do not hesitate! I will collect
ideas etc. and they may be added to the report.

Thanks,

- -- 
[email-masked]

> NAMES COUNCIL .ORG DIVESTITURE TASK FORCE
> > v 5.2 (January 4, 2002)
> >
> > The .org registry should be operated for the benefit of the worldwide
> > community of organizations, groups, and individuals engaged in
> > noncommercial communication via the Internet. Responsibility for .org
> > administration should be delegated to a non-profit organization that
> has
> > widespread support from and acts on behalf of that community.
> >
> > The notions of sponsorship and restriction, as applied elsewhere in
> the
> > gTLD process, do not provide an adequate framework for the .org
> > divestiture. Some clear statement of administrative and marketing
> > practices will be necessary but this must not result in an exclusive
> > boundary being set around the community of eligible registrants. The
> > manner in which the normative guidelines are labeled is not a primary
> > consideration, but the framework should include all the points below.
> >
> > 1. Characteristics of the Organization
> >
> > 1a. The initial delegation of the .org TLD should be to a non-profit
> > organization that is controlled by noncommercial .org registrants. We
> > recognize that noncommercial registrants do not have uniform views
> about
> > policy and management, and that no single organization can fully
> > encompass the diversity of global civil society. Nevertheless,
> applicant
> > organizations should be able to demonstrate support and participation
> > from a significant number of international noncommercial .org
> registrants.
> > The organization's policies and practices should strive to be
> responsive to
> >
> > and supportive of the noncommercial Internet user community, and
> reflect
> > as much of its diversity as possible.
> >
> > 1b. Applicants for operation of the .org registry should be recognized
> non-
> > profit entities (including corporations, associations, partnerships or
>
> > cooperatives as those terms are defined in the legal jurisdiction in
> which
> > the organization is established). Subcontracting of operational
> functions
> > to
> > for-profit providers is permitted.
> >
> > 1c. Applicants should propose governance structures for the .org TLD
> that
> > provide all .org registrants with the opportunity to directly
> participate
> > in
> > the selection of officers and/or policy-making council members. The
> bylaws
> > should provide explicitly for an open, transparent and participatory
> > process by which .org operating policies are initiated, reviewed and
> > revised in a manner which reflects the interests of .org domain name
> > holders and is consistent with the terms of its registry agreement
> with
> > ICANN.
> >
> > 1d. In order to permit the largest number of qualified non-profit
> > organizations to compete for award of the .org TLD contract, the Board
>
> > should require no more than the equivalent of USD$200,000 in
> demonstrated
> > financial resources from applicants.
> >
> > 2. Policy Guidelines for Applicants
> >
> > 2a. Definition of the .org community
> > Each applicant organization should include in its application a
> definition
> > of
> > the relevant community for which names in the .org TLD are intended,
> > detailing the types of registrants who constitute the target market
> for
> > .org, and proposing marketing and branding practices oriented toward
> > that community.
> >
> > The definition of the relevant community should be much broader than
> > simply formal non-profit organizations. It must also include
> individuals
> > and
> > groups seeking an outlet for noncommercial expression and information
> > exchange, unincorporated cultural, educational and political
> organizations,
> >
> > and business partnerships with non-profits and community groups for
> > social initiatives.
> >
> > 2b. No eligibility requirements
> > Dot org will continue to be operated without eligibility requirements.
> With
> > a
> > definition of the served community and appropriate marketing practices
> in
> > place, the organization and the registrars should rely entirely on
> end-user
> >
> > choice to determine who registers in .org.
> >
> > Specifically, applicants:
> > * Must not propose to evict existing registrants who do not conform to
> its
> > target community. Current registrants must not have their
> registrations
> > cancelled nor should they be denied the opportunity to renew their
> names
> > or transfer them to others.
> >
> > * Must not attempt to impose any new prior restrictions on people or
> > organizations attempting to register names, or propose any new dispute
>
> > initiation procedures that could result in the cancellation of domain
> > delegations. The UDRP would apply as per section 5 below, however.
> >
> > 2c. Surplus funds
> > Applicants should specify how they plan to disburse any surplus funds.
>
> > Use of surplus funds for purposes not directly related to dot org
> registry
> > operation is permitted, provided that the registry operation itself is
>
> > adequately sustained and that the additional purposes bear some
> > relationship to Internet administration and policy. For example,
> applicants
> >
> > are encouraged to propose methods of supporting and assisting non-
> > commercial participants in the ICANN process. Uses intended only to
> > subsidize other activities of the organization or its subsidiaries,
> > activities
> > that are not subject to oversight and management by the .org
> > governance arrangements, should not be considered.
> >
> > 2d. Registrars
> > All ICANN-accredited registrars should be eligible to register names
> in
> > .org.
> > However, applicants are encouraged to propose methods of managing the
> > relationship between the registry and registrars that encourage
> > differentiation of the domain.
> >
> > 2e. Definition of marketing practices
> > Differentiation of the domain is a key policy objective in the
> transition,
> > and
> > new marketing practices are the primary tool for achieving that
> objective.
> > Applicants should propose specific marketing policies and practices
> > designed to differentiate the domain, promote and attract
> registrations
> > from the defined community, and minimize defensive and duplicative
> > registrations.
> >
> > 3. The Verisign endowment
> >
> > Applicants should meet all requirements needed to qualify for the $5
> > million
> > endowment from Verisign. Applications should describe how they propose
>
> > to utilize the endowment and the timing of its use.
> >
> > 4. The Registry Operator
> >
> > Any entity chosen by the TLD delegee to operate the .org registry must
>
> > function efficiently and reliably and show its commitment to a high
> quality
> >
> > of service for all .org users worldwide, including a commitment to
> making
> > registration, assistance and other services available in different
> time
> > zones and different languages. The price of registration proposed by
> the
> > new entity should be as low as feasible consistent with the
> maintenance of
> > good quality service. Protocols used by the new registry should
> minimize
> > transitional expenses for registrars.
> >
> > 5. ICANN Policies
> >
> > The .org administration must adhere to policies defined through ICANN
> > processes, such as policies regarding registrar accreditation, shared
> > registry access, the uniform dispute resolution policy, and access to
> > registration contact data via WHOIS.
> >
> > 6. Follow up
> >
> > ICANN should invite applications from qualifying non-profit
> organizations
> > to assume responsibility for operation of the .org registry with a
> deadline
> >
> > no later than 30 June 2002, so that an evaluation, selection and
> > agreement process may be completed well in advance of the 31 December
> > expiration of the current agreement with Verisign.
> >
> > ICANN will provide an opportunity for the Names Council to review the
> > request for proposals (RFP) prepared by the ICANN staff prior to its
> public
> >
> > dissemination, and will adjust the RFP as needed in consultation with
> the
> > Task Force to ensure compliance with the policy. Application fees
> should
> > be as low as possible consistent with the objective of discouraging
> > frivolous applications.
> >
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail [email-masked]
> Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
>
> --
> 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: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:08:03 +0100
From: "DNSO Secretariat" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Call for Endorsements -GA Chair, Alternate Chair close at 21:00 UTC 04 January

[To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]]
[To: [email-masked]]

04 January 2002

Election to the Chair and Alternate Chair of the DNSO GA
- --------------------------------------------------------

The Call for Endorsements closes today, Friday, 04 January 2002,
at 21:00 UTC, 22:00 CET (Paris time).
After 23:30 Paris time any message sent to list [email-masked]
is returned with a Delivery-Report "User unknown".

The Candidates for the Chair of the General Assembly (GA) are:

 * Kristy McKee: nomination, acceptance and list of 10 endorsers
   in http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-endorsements/2002.kmk.html

 * Thomas Roessler: nomination, acceptance and list of 11 endorsers 
   in http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-endorsements/2002.tro.html

 * Alexander Svensson: nomination, acceptance and list of 12 endorsers 
   in http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-endorsements/2002.asv.html

 * Eric Dierker: nomination, acceptance and list of 2 endorsers
   in http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-endorsements/2002.ehd.html

Archives of endorsements received:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-endorsements/Arc02

Please consult
       http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2002.DNSO-GAchair.html
for more information on the DNSO GA Chair election.

On Saturday, 05 January 2002, at 18:00 CET (Paris time), the ballots
will be sent to the members of the GA Voting Registry, who will
select the Chair and the Alternate Chair according to adopted procedures
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-chair-election-rules-v0.2.html.

It is an advisory vote by the GA to advise the Names Council of
its preferences. 

The actual voting procedure for the General Assembly Chair and 
Alternate Chair will be posted shortly before the ballots are sent out.

DNSO Secretariat

DNSO Secretariat

- --
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: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 10:46:24 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Comment please: .ORG task force (Re: [ga] .ORG Divestiture TaskForce v. 5.2)

thank you very much for this update,
Please enlighten us on enforcement procedures.

Theory is all well and good but how do we enforce?

Again thank you for your hard work on this project.

Eric

Marc Schneiders wrote:

> [Jeff was trying to outwit me by posting this text :-)]
>
> As it was unclear (and still is) whether this is the final version, but
> since it was posted for comment to the NCDNHC list not long ago, I think I
> should present it to you all in the GA now, as your representative in the
> task force that wrote the draft.  Yesterday night the task force had a
> teleconference, which proved to be quite productive in solving remaining
> issues, but not everything is fully final now (quite apart from the need
> of adoption of the text by the Names Council etc.).
>
> The most important issues for me, as your representative, which I put in
> my statement accepting to be on this task force, were (and still) are:
>
> * no domains already registered cancelled ('grandfathering');
> * a positive approach to diversify TLDs, meaning that in some way ORG
> should be mainly or basically a non-commercial (individual, community
> etc.) TLD, not a duplicate of COM;
> * a policy for ORG that really works (checking all registrations is really
> impossible and/or too expensive)
> * registrants' influence (preferably via elections, if possible) on the
> management
>
> I think all of these points are quite well represented in the text. I am
> happy with it, even if it is a compromise.
>
> If any on the GA list has comments, please do not hesitate! I will collect
> ideas etc. and they may be added to the report.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> [email-masked]
>
> > NAMES COUNCIL .ORG DIVESTITURE TASK FORCE
> > > v 5.2 (January 4, 2002)
> > >
> > > The .org registry should be operated for the benefit of the worldwide
> > > community of organizations, groups, and individuals engaged in
> > > noncommercial communication via the Internet. Responsibility for .org
> > > administration should be delegated to a non-profit organization that
> > has
> > > widespread support from and acts on behalf of that community.
> > >
> > > The notions of sponsorship and restriction, as applied elsewhere in
> > the
> > > gTLD process, do not provide an adequate framework for the .org
> > > divestiture. Some clear statement of administrative and marketing
> > > practices will be necessary but this must not result in an exclusive
> > > boundary being set around the community of eligible registrants. The
> > > manner in which the normative guidelines are labeled is not a primary
> > > consideration, but the framework should include all the points below.
> > >
> > > 1. Characteristics of the Organization
> > >
> > > 1a. The initial delegation of the .org TLD should be to a non-profit
> > > organization that is controlled by noncommercial .org registrants. We
> > > recognize that noncommercial registrants do not have uniform views
> > about
> > > policy and management, and that no single organization can fully
> > > encompass the diversity of global civil society. Nevertheless,
> > applicant
> > > organizations should be able to demonstrate support and participation
> > > from a significant number of international noncommercial .org
> > registrants.
> > > The organization's policies and practices should strive to be
> > responsive to
> > >
> > > and supportive of the noncommercial Internet user community, and
> > reflect
> > > as much of its diversity as possible.
> > >
> > > 1b. Applicants for operation of the .org registry should be recognized
> > non-
> > > profit entities (including corporations, associations, partnerships or
> >
> > > cooperatives as those terms are defined in the legal jurisdiction in
> > which
> > > the organization is established). Subcontracting of operational
> > functions
> > > to
> > > for-profit providers is permitted.
> > >
> > > 1c. Applicants should propose governance structures for the .org TLD
> > that
> > > provide all .org registrants with the opportunity to directly
> > participate
> > > in
> > > the selection of officers and/or policy-making council members. The
> > bylaws
> > > should provide explicitly for an open, transparent and participatory
> > > process by which .org operating policies are initiated, reviewed and
> > > revised in a manner which reflects the interests of .org domain name
> > > holders and is consistent with the terms of its registry agreement
> > with
> > > ICANN.
> > >
> > > 1d. In order to permit the largest number of qualified non-profit
> > > organizations to compete for award of the .org TLD contract, the Board
> >
> > > should require no more than the equivalent of USD$200,000 in
> > demonstrated
> > > financial resources from applicants.
> > >
> > > 2. Policy Guidelines for Applicants
> > >
> > > 2a. Definition of the .org community
> > > Each applicant organization should include in its application a
> > definition
> > > of
> > > the relevant community for which names in the .org TLD are intended,
> > > detailing the types of registrants who constitute the target market
> > for
> > > .org, and proposing marketing and branding practices oriented toward
> > > that community.
> > >
> > > The definition of the relevant community should be much broader than
> > > simply formal non-profit organizations. It must also include
> > individuals
> > > and
> > > groups seeking an outlet for noncommercial expression and information
> > > exchange, unincorporated cultural, educational and political
> > organizations,
> > >
> > > and business partnerships with non-profits and community groups for
> > > social initiatives.
> > >
> > > 2b. No eligibility requirements
> > > Dot org will continue to be operated without eligibility requirements.
> > With
> > > a
> > > definition of the served community and appropriate marketing practices
> > in
> > > place, the organization and the registrars should rely entirely on
> > end-user
> > >
> > > choice to determine who registers in .org.
> > >
> > > Specifically, applicants:
> > > * Must not propose to evict existing registrants who do not conform to
> > its
> > > target community. Current registrants must not have their
> > registrations
> > > cancelled nor should they be denied the opportunity to renew their
> > names
> > > or transfer them to others.
> > >
> > > * Must not attempt to impose any new prior restrictions on people or
> > > organizations attempting to register names, or propose any new dispute
> >
> > > initiation procedures that could result in the cancellation of domain
> > > delegations. The UDRP would apply as per section 5 below, however.
> > >
> > > 2c. Surplus funds
> > > Applicants should specify how they plan to disburse any surplus funds.
> >
> > > Use of surplus funds for purposes not directly related to dot org
> > registry
> > > operation is permitted, provided that the registry operation itself is
> >
> > > adequately sustained and that the additional purposes bear some
> > > relationship to Internet administration and policy. For example,
> > applicants
> > >
> > > are encouraged to propose methods of supporting and assisting non-
> > > commercial participants in the ICANN process. Uses intended only to
> > > subsidize other activities of the organization or its subsidiaries,
> > > activities
> > > that are not subject to oversight and management by the .org
> > > governance arrangements, should not be considered.
> > >
> > > 2d. Registrars
> > > All ICANN-accredited registrars should be eligible to register names
> > in
> > > .org.
> > > However, applicants are encouraged to propose methods of managing the
> > > relationship between the registry and registrars that encourage
> > > differentiation of the domain.
> > >
> > > 2e. Definition of marketing practices
> > > Differentiation of the domain is a key policy objective in the
> > transition,
> > > and
> > > new marketing practices are the primary tool for achieving that
> > objective.
> > > Applicants should propose specific marketing policies and practices
> > > designed to differentiate the domain, promote and attract
> > registrations
> > > from the defined community, and minimize defensive and duplicative
> > > registrations.
> > >
> > > 3. The Verisign endowment
> > >
> > > Applicants should meet all requirements needed to qualify for the $5
> > > million
> > > endowment from Verisign. Applications should describe how they propose
> >
> > > to utilize the endowment and the timing of its use.
> > >
> > > 4. The Registry Operator
> > >
> > > Any entity chosen by the TLD delegee to operate the .org registry must
> >
> > > function efficiently and reliably and show its commitment to a high
> > quality
> > >
> > > of service for all .org users worldwide, including a commitment to
> > making
> > > registration, assistance and other services available in different
> > time
> > > zones and different languages. The price of registration proposed by
> > the
> > > new entity should be as low as feasible consistent with the
> > maintenance of
> > > good quality service. Protocols used by the new registry should
> > minimize
> > > transitional expenses for registrars.
> > >
> > > 5. ICANN Policies
> > >
> > > The .org administration must adhere to policies defined through ICANN
> > > processes, such as policies regarding registrar accreditation, shared
> > > registry access, the uniform dispute resolution policy, and access to
> > > registration contact data via WHOIS.
> > >
> > > 6. Follow up
> > >
> > > ICANN should invite applications from qualifying non-profit
> > organizations
> > > to assume responsibility for operation of the .org registry with a
> > deadline
> > >
> > > no later than 30 June 2002, so that an evaluation, selection and
> > > agreement process may be completed well in advance of the 31 December
> > > expiration of the current agreement with Verisign.
> > >
> > > ICANN will provide an opportunity for the Names Council to review the
> > > request for proposals (RFP) prepared by the ICANN staff prior to its
> > public
> > >
> > > dissemination, and will adjust the RFP as needed in consultation with
> > the
> > > Task Force to ensure compliance with the policy. Application fees
> > should
> > > be as low as possible consistent with the objective of discouraging
> > > frivolous applications.
> > >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail [email-masked]
> > Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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

- --
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 #952
************************