[ga] Fw: MISSING DOCUMENTS - eight days and still not even an acknowledgement
Title: Help It is now EIGHT days since I sent Dan Halloran,
Vint Cerf, and Stuart Lynn a simple enquiry about the existence and whereabouts
of the Afilias documents that should have been available for months in
compliance with Appendix U of the Registry Agreement between ICANN and Afilias,
as an essential part of the NewTLDs Evaluation Process.
Not one of them has even had the courtesy to
acknowledge my enquiry.
It is wholly unacceptable that evasion of this kind
should continue.
Beneath are copies of my enquiries, to which I have
since added a more comprehensive mail viewable on this GA list and also posted
as a story at IcannWatch.
It's simple : ICANN wants broad participation in
the New TLD Evaluation Process (which has great significance for the issue of
future TLDs). These missing documents are central and essential to the Process.
I've asked simple questions.
Do they exist? (If not, that is wholly unacceptable
- they were mandatory and vital to the process)
Where are they? (Please could Karl Auerbach view
them, and check the dates of receipt.)
Why are they being withheld (when Appendix U
specifically stated that they could be made available after short periods of
time, now clearly expired)?
Why won't ICANN (or Hal Lubsen of Afilias who has
also been contacted) even acknowledge this enquiry?
This is the conduct of "people in hiding" in my
opinion. This is not open conduct or professional demeanour. This is a dismissal
of the ICANN community, its constituencies, and all parties.
I will keep asking for these
documents.
Sincerely,
Richard Henderson
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Henderson
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 12:25 AM
Subject: MISSING DOCUMENTS - ICANN is evading these
questions Dear Mr Halloran (and colleagues at
ICANN)
I still have not had any reply concerning the
MISSING DOCUMENTS : "Proof of Concept Evaluation reports" from Afilias, in
accordance with Appendix U of the .info Agreement with ICANN.
I would like to ask more urgently and specifically
these straightforward and reasonable questions:
1. Have Afilias, as of 21st August 2002, submitted
the documents required of them under Appendix U?
2. Given the community's need for these documents
if it is to participate in the NewTLD Evaluation Process in an informed manner,
why has ICANN not published these documents?
3. According to the Agreement, these documents were
only to be kept private for a limited time. In various cases (and the majority)
the time for these documents to be kept private has expired (indeed
significantly). Can ICANN detail the state-of-play for each document and
section (as outlined in Appendix U)?
4. Why has no-one from ICANN responded to my polite
request concerning these MISSING DOCUMENTS?
As I explained in my two previous mails, these
Evaluation reports are central documents for all constituencies who wish to
participate in the NewTLD Evaluation Process. I have been participating for over
a year on ICANN's own NewTLDs Evaluation Forum (and its predecessor)
and am recognised as having a detailed knowledge of the process and its
impact, from the user/registrant point of view. I am also an elected @large
representative and a regular participant in the GA. I feel my
request deserves a serious response.
These key DOCUMENTS are, as of now, MISSING
and UNACCOUNTED FOR. I feel sure you can
account for them by answering my enquiry.
I should like to ask Nancy Victory, as an honorable
party engaged in reviewing ICANN's reforms, whether she feels that ICANN's
silences in matters like these indicate the undertaking for
greater openness (and responsiveness?) made to her recently by Mr Stuart
Lynn? Furthermore, how can various constituencies in ICANN participate in
evaluating and developing policy, and seeking consensus, if they are not even
able to view key documents in the "Proof of Concept" evaluation process?
Besides, these were documents which were expressly not intended to remain
private (stated clearly in Appendix U) and there can be little integrity in the
Proof of Concept process if they either (a) haven't been submitted, or (b) are
being withheld.
My request is formally and politely made to you,
and I request your kind attention and professional response (including
acknowledgement of the receipt of this and my previous e-mails).
Kind regards
Richard Henderson
|