DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] Please make comments on

Dear Ken,

> i personally feel that a names council meeting is NOT the place to provide
> forum for those who are not satisifed with a previous decision. the issues
> were discussed and a vote was taken. if any individual or constituancy
> wishes to lobby for or against a previous names council decision the best
> forum for this is by e-mail to any of the relevent lists or directly to
> ICANN board members. You are also aware that the GA and the Board also
> provide time at their respective open meetings for public advocacies &
> comments by individuals and constituancies as well.

Totally AGREE upon this.

> if we provide time and a podium for one person or constituancy to lobby &
> advocate then it would be incumbent on us to provide equal time for
> rebuttals or additional constituancies to do the same. This would
> significantly diminish the time available for us to become more informed
> and act on other issues such as the "global outreach" and "developing
> countries perspective".

Thank you again for your serious concerns in those two critical issues
such as "global outreach" and "developing perspective".

> as such and based on further elaborations provided by the proposer, i do
> feel it is appropriate for this specific item #4 to be placed on the

Respecting the judgement of Chair of NC,
I also would like to second your very thoughtful motion.
Ken wrote:
I would also like to propose another agenda item as follows:

after almost 2 years of DNSO operation I feel it would be a good idea for
the names council to consider a little "self reflection" and take a close
look at how we can make this body which represents such a diverse set of
interests sharing a universal commonality  more efficient and effective in
the future.

Appreciating your last-minite coordination before Yokohama meeting,
I hope we can have a productive meeting.



> ken stubbs
> >
> > > # 4: I am a little confused about the scope, and large amount of time
> > > allotted to this topic. I think that this is something that may be
> better
> > > addressed by a Task Force. I volunteer to come to the NC meeting in
> > Yokohama
> > > with a proposal outlining this suggestion. I know it's an issue that
> > Working
> > > Group D has also been made aware of.
> >
> > Thank you for your volunteer.
> > However, if we can make a time slot for those who want to appeal against
> > NC's recommendation to the ICANN Board, it would be more reasonable.
> >

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>