Re: [wg-review] Ten Topics of Review WG
I second the motion on proposed articles 11, 12, and 13.
> Dear Chair and all on WG-Review,
> you proposed a list of 10 subjects the NC has asked us to review. I
> that procedure which is clear and you already documented by one mail per
> 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
> 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
> It has been first seconded by Miles (Gene) Marsh ("I second your motion
> 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
> 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
> - 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