Re: [wg-review] Ten Topics of Review WG

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Chair and all on WG-Review,
you proposed a list of 10 subjects the NC has asked us to review. I support 
that procedure which is clear and you already documented by one mail per 
subject.

You also accepted that new subjects might be added by Members us. You 
introduced the subject the election of the DNSO/GA Chair by the GA.


1. I second this proposition if Roberto Gatenao also seconds it formally to 
give more weight to this new subject.


2. I introduce the two subjects I proposed by a motion now seconded.

11. [IDNH] individual domain holder constituency, Report requested by 
WG-Review Members

It has been first seconded by Joana Lane ("I would also second Jefsey 
Morfin's proposal to form a sub-working group for an IDNH constituency and 
would very much like to be involved in that. I imagine this would be 
handled through this distribution list by adding a separate numbered 11 
category heading, if Ms Park is amenable")..

12. [STLD] specialized TLD constituency, Report requested by WG-Review Members

It has been first seconded by Miles (Gene) Marsh ("I second your motion for 
the creation of a sTLD constituency group. A review of the applicants at 
the recent board meeting shows many special purpose TLDs that function 
somewhat differently than the typical definition of at gTLD. I believe it 
is a topic worth pursuing").


3. Procedure for the  11. [IDNH] and 12. [STLD] subjects

With the Members who have seconded me or will do now, will I will compile 
the topics to be addressed on his two subjects. I already gathered some 
inputs from this list. I will now also post an abstract of this mail on 
various concerned ML for the largest number of interested persons and 
stakeholders may introduce heir concerns, what I feel of the utmost 
interest for this WG-Review Members, for the NC, for the Staff and for the 
BoD. A summary will then be published ASAP so you may use it for your 
interim report, and will then be kept updated as your did for the fist 10 
subjects.


4. 13. [DNSO/GA Chair election] Report requested by WG-Review Members

I suggest we follow the same procedure when Roberto has approved your 
motion. We will then be able to copy a similar request for inputs on the 
DNSO/GA list. To simplify the management of the messages (whether sent on 
this list or sent privately) I suggest we respect the procedure you 
proposed and supported by Joana Lane, i.e. that we keep the following 
subject in the related mails

- 11. [IDNH] individual domain holder constituency, Report requested by 
WG-Review Members
- 12. [STLD] specialized TLD constituency, Report requested by WG-Review 
Members
- 13. [DNSO/GA Chair election] Report requested by WG-Review Members

To initiate these threads I will copy this WG-Review list the mail sent to 
other specialized mailing lists.

Jefsey Morfin

On 05:48 28/12/00, YJ Park said:
>Additional issues and concerns can be freely discussed if the necessity
>arises such as General Assembly Chair election process.
>
>To make discussion more effective from now on, whenever members
>circulate the message to the list, it is recommended for members to
>specify the subject title out of ten here. - the subject can be expanded
>subject to the requests by members.
>
>1. [Charter] Review Process Background and Charter Discussion
>2. [Outreach and DNSO] Report requested by NC
>3. [Constituencies] Report requested by NC
>4. [GA] Report requested by NC
>5. [Working Group] Report requested by NC
>6. [Secretariat] Report requested by NC
>7. [Names Council] Report requested by NC
>8. [WG A, B, C and DNSO] Report requested by NC
>9. [DNSO Quality] Report requested by NC
>10. [The Board and DNSO] Report requested by NC
>
>Thanks,
>YJ