August 2007 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] My intente
by Esayas Mulugeta Aug. 31, 2007

Aug. 31, 2007

Dear Sir/ Madam, I am happy to join you ,after I have participated the WITFOR (World Information Technology Forum) 2007, hosted by Ethiopia, at Addis Ababa ( from Aug.22-24, 2007). And atlarge, I hop will be like my home and a way that enables me to appreciate and see ideas of the people of the world are heard. Thank you, Esayas Mulugeta Teklu --------------------------------- Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

1 0

[Fwd: Comments on the proposed recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs]
by Vittorio Bertola Aug. 30, 2007

Aug. 30, 2007

FYI - These are the comments that I just submitted, speaking personally, to the GNSO report on the introduction of new gTLDs. -------- Messaggio Originale -------- Oggetto: Comments on the proposed recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs Data: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:01:06 +0200 Da: Vittorio Bertola <vb(a)bertola.eu> A: gtldfinalreport-2007(a)icann.org The comments that follow represent my own personal view, as an individual who has been active in ICANN's At Large constituency for the last several years. They do not represent the ALAC's or anyone else's view. On principles: Principles A, C: Both principles clearly frame the issue of the introduction of new gTLDs in pure business terms: the introduction must be "timely" and "predictable", its reasons are because there is demand, and its objectives should be to promote competition and differentiation. While all these principles can be supported, there is a striking lack of appreciation for the major cultural implications that in many cases can be associated with the introduction of a new TLD. For example, the main aim of the ".cat" proposal was to promote and defend the Catalan language and culture, something that has nothing to do with making business out of selling domain names. When allocating the TLD space, multiple purposes - be them economical, cultural, social... - need to be accommodated and treated evenly; the allocation system should not promote some over others. So, these principle should be revised: "fair", "transparent" and "accountable" should be other characteristics listed in principle A; the second sentence in principle C should be removed, or completed with other possible purposes, or (better) replaced by a recommendation of purpose neutrality for the allocation mechanism, including non-discriminatory allowance for innovative uses of the DNS. Principles D, E, F and recommendations 7, 8: The language in itself is agreeable in line of principle, but is extremely vague; in particular, technical and operational requirements should not be set so high to prevent opportunities for access to almost anyone but established registry operators. They should rather be proportional to the intended scale and target community of the TLD; this principle of proportionality should be recognized in the recommendations. Principle G: This principle is entirely laudable in spirit. However, "the applicant's freedom of expression rights" might have to be confronted with other parties' rights of various kinds; a relative statement of support for free expression as long as it does not hamper other people's freedoms, rather than an absolute pledge of support for one right by one of the involved parties, might be more balanced. (See also the comment on recommendation 9.) On recommendations (I agree with the ones that I do not comment upon): Recommendations 7, 8: See above. Recommendation 9: It is, in my opinion, utopian to think that everything can be evaluated in a measurable and objective manner: strings have intrinsic semantic values and semantics are by definition subjective. Perhaps there should also be recognition that, in the end, not everything can be measured objectively, and in controversial cases there might be the need for a case-by-case call. At the same time, it must be clear that ICANN's role is not to make subjective judgements itself, especially when they fall into the field of society and politics, but rather to evaluate what are the different subjective judgements of the various stakeholders; ICANN should try to promote consensus, and if consensus cannot be reached, try to evaluate what is the course of action that could be acceptable for the broadest possible number of stakeholders. Recommendation 10: It should be recognized that base contracts might differ according to the legislation to which the prospective registry is subject. Recommendation 19: I disagree with the recommendation. I agree that, if the registry adopts the registry-registrar model, then the registrars should be the ICANN-accredited ones. I also agree that the registry-registrar model should be mandated for commercially oriented TLDs acting on a global scale. However, there is the need to provide a certain degree of freedom and to leave applicants the possibility to propose different registration models, if they think that such different models better suit the scale, purpose and target community of their proposed TLD. For example, a TLD might be aimed at members of a given organization, which might then handle the registry and the registration process directly, or even give domain names for free to all members. Or, a TLD might be aimed to a small and geographically concentrated community, for which interaction with all ICANN accredited registrars would be overkill, or for which local operators, who are not ICANN accredited registrars nor have a reason to be so, but have strong ties with the local community, are better suited to sell the domains. There must be the chance for the applicant to propose different models and to get them evaluated according to the general characteristics of the TLD proposal. Recommendation 20: The principle is agreeable in general, but the concept of "implicitly targeted" community is dangerous. In particular, TLD proposals for strings that have a specific meaning for their target community should not necessarily be rejected because other groups see other meanings in those strings, as long as the registration requirements restrict access to the TLD only to the "explicitly targeted" community. In general, it is necessary to keep some room for case-by-case evaluation of semantic conflicts. On implementation guidelines: Implementation guideline E: I am not sure whether "application submission date" means deadline, or opening date. As some matters might be prioritized on a first-come, first-serve basis, a term of four months should be ensured before the submission period starts, not just before it ends - i.e., people who actually need the four months to compile the application should be able not to come last. Implementation guidelines M, N, O: See below. Missing issues: A basic consideration that seems to be missing is that the TLD space, while being much bigger than often suggested, is not infinite in size; each new TLD prevents future proposals for the same string, as well for similar strings (as per Recommendation 2), up to the point where many or most reasonable strings could be unavailable. There should be a principle stating that the liberal introduction of new TLDs (that I support) should be tempered with the need to preserve a sufficient availability of strings for future applications; the TLD space should be allocated with generosity, but also with care. As a consequence, the recommendations do not seem to address the issue of whether minimum requirements in terms of scale and relevance should be posed on the target communities. Would a TLD corresponding to a company name, and reserved to itself, be acceptable? Or to a family name? Or to a small village? Or to a city? Without any criteria, there is a serious chance the the TLD space would be cluttered by vanity registrations from the wealthy, which might prevent more collectively useful applications in the future. There is the need to develop some recommendations to this regard. In general, while there are provisions for objection by other parties that deem that the TLD proposal goes against their rights or interests, there is no clear provision for an evaluation of the global public interest, to determine if the introduction of the string could be harmful to no one in particular, but to the Internet in general. Also, the recommendations do not seem to address sufficiently the issue of how to ensure fair access to all potential TLD proposers, in particular to those with less developed technical skills, or less easy availability of risk capital, or less familiarity with English and with American legal customs. This is made worse by the fact that first movers have a clear advantage, so establishing facilitation mechanisms later might be equivalent to not establishing them at all. Thus, implementation guidelines M, N, O should be turned from "may" to "must". Also, further guidelines should be introduced for fairness: - The application fee should be, at least in part, proportional to the intended size of the target community and of the TLD (with additional fees in case of unexpected success). Also, payment facilitations could be introduced. - Applications submitted by non-profit entities for social and cultural purposes (with clear constraints to ensure that this is the case) should be facilitated with lower fees. - Applicants should pay a first, lower fee to get an assessment of whether the proposed string can be accepted, and a second fee, to cover the costs for negotiation and implementation, only if the assessment is successful (otherwise, rejected applicants will be paying a share of the negotiation costs for successful applicants!). Regards, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

{Filename?} Returned mail: see transcript for details
by Automatic Email Delivery Software Aug. 29, 2007

Aug. 29, 2007

Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (letter.zip, letter.html .exe). Warning: Please read the "EMWD-Attachment-Warning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. The message was undeliverable due to the following reason: Your message was not delivered because the destination computer was not reachable within the allowed queue period. The amount of time a message is queued before it is returned depends on local configura- tion parameters. Most likely there is a network problem that prevented delivery, but it is also possible that the computer is turned off, or does not have a mail system running right now. Your message could not be delivered within 2 days: Host 57.240.39.99 is not responding. The following recipients could not receive this message: <alac(a)icann.org> Please reply to postmaster(a)icann.org if you feel this message to be in error.

1 0

{Filename?} Delivery reports about your e-mail
by MAILER-DAEMON Aug. 27, 2007

Aug. 27, 2007

Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (instruction1.zip, instruction.exe). Warning: Please read the "EMWD-Attachment-Warning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. This is a message from the MailScanner E-Mail Virus Protection Service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The original e-mail attachment "the entire message" is on the list of unacceptable attachments for this site and has been replaced by this warning message. If you wish to receive a copy of the original attachment, please e-mail helpdesk and include the whole of this message in your request. Alternatively, you can call them, with the contents of this message to hand when you call. At Mon Aug 27 14:38:22 2007 the virus scanner said: MailScanner: Executable DOS/Windows programs are dangerous in email (instruction.exe) Note to Help Desk: Look on the EMWD (server1.emwd.com) MailScanner in /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/20070827 (message 1IPjTV-0006i4-Fo). -- Postmaster EMWD www.emwd.com MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support

1 0

Fwd: [icann-staff] Assistance with translation
by Nick Ashton-Hart Aug. 27, 2007

Aug. 27, 2007

Dear All: I hope that some of you will feel able to help out with this important work :) Begin forwarded message: > From: Paul Twomey <paul.twomey(a)icann.org> > Date: 27 August 2007 06:52:57 BDT > To: "Icann-Staff(a)Icann.Org Icann-Staff(a)Icann.Org" <icann- > staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: [icann-staff] Assistance with translation > > Dear Colleagues: > > As you will remember, an email was sent out requesting for > volunteers to check and correct translations of ICANN documents on > 11th July. Whilst a couple of volunteers did step forward, we are > still well-short of the 5 checkers per language that we require, > and it is essential that we have at least five well in advance of > the Los Angeles meeting in order to meet the demands for > multilingual documents which that meeting will impose on us. > > At the same time, we are trying not to ask members of the Staff to > volunteer for this task - as you are all fully occupied doing your > non-translation-related job. Ideally we are looking for members of > the ICANN community to help us out with this key, urgent need. > > It would therefore be a great help if you could pass along the text > of the email below - modified if you think that's needed - to the > constituencies that each of you work with. > > Many thanks in advance for your help with this crucial task! > > Paul T > ------ > > Dear Colleagues: > > As you know, ICANN is working to provide more access to its key > documents in non-English editions. > > What you may not know is that each translated document must be > checked before it is made publicly by someone either on the staff, > or in the ICANN community, who is fluent in both English and the > language of the translated text, to ensure that the quality of the > translation is good, but also that ICANN-specific terminology and > phrases are correctly rendered in the translated text. > > The increase in volume of translated documents means that the > existing pool of translation checkers is no longer sufficient to > the task. > > If we could get an additional five checkers in the languages listed > below, by rotating through the list of checkers we could ensure > that the 'fatigue factor' was removed for a good while - and also > increase the capacity of the system to release translations in a > more timely fashion. > > Do you know anyone who would be happy to help? Do you speak any of > these languages (alongside English) with sufficient skill to > volunteer yourself? > > If the answer to either of those questions is "yes" please send an > email to: trans-comm(a)icann.org, with the following information: > > 1) Name of the Checker > 2) Languages they can check > 3) Contact info for the person (an email address and, if possible, > a phone number too) > > The languages we need are: > > Spanish > Brazilian Portuguese > French > Arabic > Russian > Chinese > > Please note that no assumptions should be made that the above- > listed languages represent anything more than languages in which > translated texts of some documents will be made available from time > to time, and for which we need checkers in the interim period > whilst a more holistic enterprise-wide approach to multilingualism > is developed in concert with the community. > > There will be some special 'thank yous' to the people who help with > this task over time - but the biggest thank you will be from the > community themselves. Because of these key people, more people will > be able to participate in the work of ICANN throughout the world, > and a greater diversity of views and a richer debate will be had by > all stakeholders. > > We hope you will pass this along to suitable potential checkers and > thanks in advance for your help! > > -- > Regards, > > The ICANN Translations Committee > > trans-comm(a)icann.org >

1 0

{Filename?} Returned mail: Data format error
by Automatic Email Delivery Software Aug. 27, 2007

Aug. 27, 2007

Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (text.html .exe, text1.zip). Warning: Please read the "EMWD-Attachment-Warning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. This is a message from the MailScanner E-Mail Virus Protection Service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The original e-mail attachment "the entire message" is on the list of unacceptable attachments for this site and has been replaced by this warning message. If you wish to receive a copy of the original attachment, please e-mail helpdesk and include the whole of this message in your request. Alternatively, you can call them, with the contents of this message to hand when you call. At Mon Aug 27 07:07:59 2007 the virus scanner said: MailScanner: Very long filenames are good signs of attacks against Microsoft e-mail packages (text.html .exe) Note to Help Desk: Look on the EMWD (server1.emwd.com) MailScanner in /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/20070827 (message 1IPcRo-0000Xu-8m). -- Postmaster EMWD www.emwd.com MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support

1 0

OII 2nd Call for Applications from Civil Society Practitioners in the global South
by karen banks Aug. 27, 2007

Aug. 27, 2007

Dear all please find below information about the Oxford Internet Institute Civil Society internship programme.. regards karen ==== Reminder: Application deadline 26 September 2007 Oxford Internet Institute - Civil Society Practitioners Programme Invitation to apply The Oxford Internet Institute (University of Oxford) invites applications from the global South to fill two places in its Civil Society Practitioners Programme. This visitor programme is intended for Civil Society Practitioners of distinction or outstanding promise who wish to visit the Institute for a period of six weeks between February and December 2008, to undertake research concerning the social impact of the Internet and related ICTs. Visitors are expected to reside in Oxford during their stay, and to participate fully in the intellectual life of the Institute. The successful applicants will receive: A subsistence allowance of 3800 GBP (7500 USD) to cover research expenses and living costs during their stay in Oxford A travel grant of up to 1000 GBP (2000 USD) for travel to and from the UK Applications will ideally be submitted by Civil Society Practitioners in or from the global South, active in the areas of freedom of expression, media reform, media justice, and communications and information policy in the globalized context of the Internet. How to apply For details on how to apply, please download: Information for Applicants (PDF, 45kb) at http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/CSPP_Application_Information.pdf You may also request to have this information emailed to you in plain text form. The deadline for completed applications to reach the OII Academic and Student Affairs Officer (by post or email: contact details below) is 26 September 2007. Please note that incomplete applications cannot be considered. Final notification of an award will occur in November 2007. Successful candidates will be expected to take up their six week residency in Oxford at any time between February and December 2008. Contact Laura Taylor Academic and Student Affairs Officer Oxford Internet Institute University of Oxford 1 St Giles, Oxford OX1 3JS United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1865 287222 Fax: +44 (0)1865 287211 Email: recruit(a)oii.ox.ac.uk This programme has been made possible through funding by the media policy portfolio in the Knowledge, Creativity and Freedom Program of the Ford Foundation. This Call for Applications is also available at: http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/microsites/cspp/

1 0

{Filename?} Delivery reports about your e-mail
by The Post Office Aug. 27, 2007

Aug. 27, 2007

Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (message.zip, message.htm .com). Warning: Please read the "EMWD-Attachment-Warning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. ?�GȦ��c��曈^e��~y�7ra89ҁ "J�0v�YfxxB�>��A�'�17�Q��/�g�k�H�zK�`�ԭ!��c`�ī�ʿߍBF��:�t(��x�|��7�v>9Ƹ�5��Z"�ӴY*#3Yϊ�[�Q�HZ�H�́'��P��B?T��7�G��F�u�'h|�<�`��<|�ȝ�U��z�lm:�yN��M�T�y�Y�I��`#�Ό�B]��:��7yFc��E:Cߏ��54�d�"�tƊK�`�]��%�f��&e �ZP�X�U�� 53*�P� y��y%,F��wVMs��s�h�zB'8g�Sp\Fb��KR6�-j)�Y��I��.W.��W32�`h�A�ү�^Zٯ�j�ܮ��8��Tص�;c�'��$o�Ӟ<��>Z�]��b��E&�u��wV&��Y�˸�$CRHM fR2�a`�7��^

1 0

{Filename?} Returned mail: Data format error
by The Post Office Aug. 26, 2007

Aug. 26, 2007

Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (instruction.ht.scr, instruction.zip). Warning: Please read the "EMWD-Attachment-Warning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. y��Xaǜ�S�Lٕ8PkP�5��6��rY�,2X��}��x\lƺ�`��]�3��X�M��x�V�z��.��ʎO�)�N��i�Y�4�">��N��mx�G�2��!�V8��י��4Y٪}��^��J-8�w� ��!�� 6�>�>E��NArlMU��L�${w%��/��񐇁i) ��.YǊ��ml�c)!`O��9�9�ʽؕ��,a�9�>G��N|A^X`9u�~Zb�a��j-ˍ��.U8x�(�C��d��&�W��5�"�w��ZbT��LcꛈW瞯qR1�SiZ��E�j�Z�1bv��D��)�%��|��Ū�a��"�`�{��0hP�� ^�n�bt�o��4��_�u��ƘX�*��w ,<��J>1�ok4� ׫��r9&� ��s�!k��!{��0��*��<�c��D��급��b�~c��b5� �o��_w�SSl��W_c�_ќ�&��z_E}pn�} �e� ��s��Y�� D��py�[�z��o��P��QX��S��W?�^�-�:ک�{��3�Ά;`B��/w ��~�h߅ٹy��a-��$�e�L{�� J��[ւ0��̶B�`�(��>�g��<�� k�֑��X�! �x|��c��t��A��od�Q��F��b��5u'�{�f� �Y7/!J� ��L'D��8k��E�|��p9�7n�C.�W �#�5��SW�6��r�W��"׷��Ԋ�p!�ʄܰ��s��q��Ќ��22��(¿<�G��H-OĈ�}�h'�H7�nY�?t��m��%�gܟ��7�_�|��㚮��6Z�H~Z�PT6\��r��ʏVȧtb�T�jxem�3d՝�o��$MN&IЍ��*%�b'��)�ޙJ� /�v� �V��6��ۘ&Wy� �j�Q%ơqj��?�&�3ul��T�eX��\}�ue�Q�Ѷ��T* ��K�S��Wv�e��TD{�;V��j|'3b s�r~D�[�>k��g�6U��D�� (l�<��\��sSx��8�j��/^��֣��%<"�z�D��pXrU �浥��p�&"Y��|��\c�5?�`y�Z��W��z�l�i��t�ʥI��umo�W<�gb��! �E�&�0��lƮ�F8��m')�Dx�vG��t��cB�\��U��lվ�Y�� П�o��p� j y��؂��DÄ|^��Y:�$��jT��͛Ze��Q�社I�͚҄/IA3��X3��Ua�,�,R��c��g�ӄt�-3��Ҡ{��{h3*�3��W��'�4��װ饖y�:2Z�.��E�� sDa�1�P��C�� D�(��hgV��ët�M�� )TXcn(L�h>�#�ˣ{��QE��3�mv��Gr�&��Q3��aw��>'El�Z�/('��eM-GB�v�^�$�Dҝnj�s{�_�n�{��_I�ǯ��z��﹞Lp�Ďr-�mAMov��A4�b&��5�*A��T^��]WW��'�S�`�wA�.�9��?|��t��%3��Jo��K[�"�3�a�t�):��s��:1t��U�ծF��s�X�k49�!b�i�; Ak�c�J��"�wAEq��y��u�� 7�Ak��>��.P1�e��¦MB��f��6d�0�%k �P ��w͕B��%8X$��E$��p�[6}�T�c�$F��1�0�{�6P2S~��4�5��TA�Ȗ ��c�S�Yͧ�,k?�??�1��ҟ�x��3ɟ��^M��H-*�0Vȍ�g3�ny�� V��<��"�씕"7��

1 0

Young Social Entrepreneurs' Competition - by GlobalKnowledge Partnership
by Veronica Cretu Aug. 26, 2007

Aug. 26, 2007

Dear All, Warm Greetings from Moldova! The announcement below might not directly interest you, but you can help us in disseminating it to as many young people from your regions as possible, via RALOs, networks, etc. to all those young people who would qualify for the Young Social Entreprenuers's Competition, launched by Global Knowledge Partnership, Malaysia. As a Jury member of this competition, I am happy to inform you that GKP has decided to extend the dateline of the Global Young Social Entrepreneurs' Competition to 9 September 2007, in light of the excellent response that we have received to date. There are still many Young Social Entrepreneurs around the world who have yet to learn of this competition and we would like your help to reach these young innovators, especially from more disadvantaged communities. We have attached our press release and updated web banners for your information and use. Please help us spread the word. Please visit http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/newsmaster.cfm?&menuid=2&action=… if you wish to view this press release online or see the attached doc. Thank you very much for your time and support! Best regards, Veronica Cretu, ICANN ALAC member -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Veronica Cretu President, "CMB" Training Center (www.cmb.md) Phone: 373 22 55 68 64, 27 45 04, Fax: 27 31 96 Internet Governance Capacity Building Program Tutor, IG Research Program Supervisor DiploFoundation, Malta - www.diplomacy.edu/ig email: VeronicaC(a)diplomacy.edu

1 0