[ga] Status Report -- Mailing Lists
Having reviewed the different proposals for new mailing lists, I have come
to a compromise that I believe will serve the current needs of this Assembly
and alleviate certain financial concerns expressed by an NC member:
1) EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS [EXT]:
ICANN Directors, Staff
Names Council, other SOs,
emerging constituencies & the public
Outreach, Participation, Translations, Education, Website &
External Relationships: To consider, build and enhance the General
Assembly's relationship with all external parties including, but not limited
to, the ICANN Board, ICANN as a body, the Names Council, other Supporting
Organizations, other internet organizations and the general public.
2. INTERNAL PROCESSES [INT]:
Rules and Procedures of the General Assembly:
List Rules & Protocols
Mailing List Management
Internal Processes: To consider, build and enhance the General Assembly's
internal control processes including, but not limited to, its accountability
structures, electoral procedures, debating processes, mailing list rules and
system of management.
3. SYSTEMS [SYS]:
Verisign Agreement (incl. .org)
New registry agreements
Systems: To consider and recommend improvements to all of ICANN's existing
policies, practices and procedures including, but not limited to
registry-registrar separation, registrar accreditation, quality assurance
and registrant/whois privacy as well as any contracts or agreements in these
or related areas.
4) COMPETITIVE ROOTS [ROOTS]:
Alternate Root Systems (Colliders)
Competitive Roots: To consider and recommend policy improvements in
relation to ICANN's relationship with external or competitive root systems
including, but not limited to, what has been called alternate or inclusive
roots, and colliding top-level domains.
5) TRADE MARKS-IP [TM]:
Trade Marks & IP: To consider and recommend policy improvements in relation
to the use of domain names as a speech mechanism including, but not limited
to, its use for advertising, promotion, protest and criticism particularly
where such use may infringe on the rights or interests of other parties such
as trade-mark holders.
6) DNSO REVIEW [REVIEW]
Ongoing DNSO review: To consider and recommend proposals that improve
operations of the DNSO as it is constituted today and those which may result
in changes in the structure of the DNSO and/or major changes in its
With regard to the technical concerns raised by the DNSO Secretariat:
1. Opening date for the mailing lists: original schedule targeted 1 May as
start date. In deference to Elisabeth, as 1 May is her Labor Day, I am now
recommending advancing the start date to April 30.
2. Closing dates for the mailing lists: As it is expected that
participants to these lists will self-organize into committees, the decision
to close any particular list will be left to the discretion of such
committees but can reasonably be expected to occur subsequent to the final
report of such committee being issued.
3. Posting Rights: As the GA is an open forum for all willing to
participate, these lists will be open to all.
4. Rules: The GA general rules of decorum shall apply to these lists and
shall be enforced by the List Monitor Team.
5. Posting Limits: Discussion on this topic has ranged from no limits, to
a 5-post-per-day-per-list rule, to a 2-post-per-day recommendation. As I
believe that this process should be as bottoms-up as possible, and as I have
no wish to stifle discussion, these lists will abide by the current
5-post-per day standard for the sake of decorum (unless it becomes the
decision of the Chair of any list committee to modify this rule in
accordance with the particular needs of such Committee).
Regarding cooperation with the Names Council: As the Names Council is
responsible for the management of the consensus building process of the
DNSO, and as these mailing lists will serve as a vehicle to attain consensus
on a number of issues, it is incumbent upon this Assembly to respect the
role of the NC in authorizing such lists and in providing necessary funding
for such Web/Listserv Maintenance as may be required (drawn from their
line-item allocation of $30,000 for such expenses in the current budget).
Philip Sheppard has notified that Assembly that he will confer with the NC
regarding these lists, and has posted a note to the Council regarding this
matter on 19 April. To date, there has been one reply to his post (from Ken
Stubbs) which comments: "i would appreciate someone with a bit more
expertise letting the members of the council know what the economic impact
would be for servicing the potential number of lists indicated here."
As the Names Council has recently (17 March & 18 April) decommissioned five
mailing lists (Famous Trade - Marks working group B, new gTLDs working group
C, Business Plan and Internal Procedures working group D, Global Awareness
and Outreach working group E, and the Review Working Group), it is
reasonable to assume that the six new mailing lists of the General assembly
will not impose any new financial burden upon the NC, as these new lists
effectively are no more than a replacement for the WG lists previously
decommissioned (please note that one proposed list [roots] is already under
consideration by the NC as a possible working group topic, in which case a
list for this topic would have been needed anyway).
Knowing that the Names Council does not seek to micro-manage the affairs of
the General Assembly, I am not anticipating any delays, and I believe that
we can reasonably expect to receive a favorable reply from Philip Sheppard
on behalf of the Names Council soon.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html