Tim - I would offer a friendly amendment to your language
to keep it within the more narrow relm proposed by Ross, as
follows:
"... that any officer, employee,
or board director of any ICANN recognized
gTLD
registry in the possession of or with access to registry
>Proprietary Information >(http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-06mar01.htm#A-
>3.1 in the case of GNR) or Registry Sensitive
Information >(http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-06mar01.htm#A-
not be permitted to participate in this constituency at any level, in any
capacity, for a period of one year since holding such position
and that our by-laws be amended to reflect this."
Regards, Elana
-----Original Message-----
From:
Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@godaddy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:29 PM
To: ross@tucows.com; wessorh@ar.com
Cc:
registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars]
PersonalNames.com
What about something like this:
"... that any officer, employee, or board director of any
ICANN recognized
gTLD registry not be permitted to
participate in this constituency at any
level, in
any capacity, for a period of one year since holding such position
and that our by-laws be amended to reflect this."
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From:
Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:36 AM
To: tim@godaddy.com; 'Rick Wesson'
Cc:
registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars]
PersonalNames.com
> Like it or not, there will never again be a clear
distinction
> between registrars and
registries. We are all in this to make
> a
profit. While I don't want people involved on this list, or
> in the RC, that have intimate, confidential
knowledge of our
> businesses, I also don't
want to preclude a legitimate party
> from
being able to participate.
Tim - if this has been lost in the exchange somewhere, let
me clarify
for the record - this is *precisely*
the sentiment and intent of the
motion. I believe
that it strikes an appropriate balance between these
two competing dynamics to the benefit of the constituency.
If there is a clearer way to word it, I am open to
friendly amendments
of the motion.
-rwr
"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the
shore like an
idiot."
-
Steven Wright
Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/blog
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org
>
[mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]
On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Wednesday,
January 29, 2003 11:46 AM
> To: Rick Wesson;
Ross Wm. Rader
> Cc: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
>
>
> Rick,
>
> > completely within our capabilities to clearly
separate
> registrars from
> > those that work for registries
>
> That I don't think I agree with.
If that is where this is
> leading then I would
object. I don't want this list, and the
> RC
that represents my business interests, captured by a group
> of mostly small registrars promoting their own
agenda.
>
> Like it
or not, there will never again be a clear distinction
> between registrars and registries. We are all in this to
make
> a profit. While I don't want people
involved on this list, or
> in the RC, that
have intimate, confidential knowledge of our
>
businesses, I also don't want to preclude a legitimate party
> from being able to participate.
>
> I see no member of the RC or this
list who I would object to
>
participating.
>
>
Tim
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Rick Wesson
>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:09 AM
>
To: Ross Wm. Rader
> Cc:
registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [registrars]
PersonalNames.com
>
>
>
>
> Ross,
>
> I support this position. I
believe that it is completely
> within our
capabilities to clearly separate registrars from
> those that work for registries and to have this
constituency
> membership only reflect
registrars intrests.
>
> best,
>
> -rick
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Ross Wm.
Rader wrote:
>
>
> I would like to formally move that any representative of any
ICANN
> > recognized gTLD registry in the
possession of or with access to
> > registry
Proprietary Information
> >
> (http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-
> 06mar01.htm#A-
> > 3.1
in the case of GNR) or Registry Sensitive Information
> >
> (http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-
> 06mar01.htm#A-
> > 3.2
also in the case of GNR) not be permitted to
>
participate in this
> > constituency at any
level, in any capacity, for a period of
> one
year
> > since the last receipt of such
information and that our by-laws be
> >
amended to reflect this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
>
>
> > Ross Wm. Rader
> > Tucows Inc.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael D. Palage"
<michael@palage.com>
> > To:
<registrars@dnso.org>
> > Sent:
Wednesday, January 29, 2003 8:26 AM
> >
Subject: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
>
>
> >
> >
> As PersonalNames is now an ICANN accredited registrar they are
> > > eligible
>
to
> > > subscribe to the registrar
mailing list, and they have asked to be
>
added.
> > To
>
> > date PersonalNames has not paid any membership dues so it is
not
> eligible
>
> to
> > > vote in any constituency
matters.
> > >
> > > Yesterday there were several posts asking the
Registrar Executive
> > Committee
> > > to schedule a call with PersonalNames.
Although the Executive
> > > Committee
stands ready to assist the constituency in this
> matter, I
> > > believe
that
> > some
>
> > dialogue between PersonalNames and the rest of the
registrar
> > > community
> > might
> > >
make any such call more productive.
> >
>
> > > The only PersonalNames
representative that has asked to join the
>
registrar
> > > mailing list to date is
Hakon Haugnes.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> >
>
> > > Michael D. Palage
> > >
> >
>
> > >
>
>
>
>
>