At 11/10/2007 11:15 AM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
I am prepared to participate in a limited duration At-Large WG on new gTLD policy... as long as there is some indication that other members of the ALAC are prepared to get some policy work done -- that means involvement from the ALAC "as a whole" in such an initiative so that folk like Vittorio don't get stuck with all the heavy lifting (as happened previously in the RAA WG).
Since the LA meeting is slightly more than two weeks from now, you are suggesting a significant effort. If you think that we can actually get ALAC members (and others) to contribute, I would be delighted. Unfortunately in the past, such efforts have devolved into being a one-person show, thus having far less credibility than they otherwise might.
We could use the gnso-liaison mailing list as the place to hold discussions on the current GNSO new gTLD recommendations so that ultimately a set of questions and/or recommendations may emerge (whether they will be directed to the GNSO Councilors or directly to the Board is for the ALAC to decide).
Regardless of what you or others may think of the process, the GNSO report on gTLDs is already delivered, so directing further comments to the GNSO council has no merit. Directing succinct and supported comments to the Board is QUITE appropriate. As far as I can see gnso-liaison list has only had one message on it (from Nick) and very few subscribers, so there is probably no conflict in using it.
Let me know if you have any issues with this approach.
regards, Danny
____________________________________________________________________________________ Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org