Let me be clear.
Rafik, how did the JAS report get in the hands of the ICANN Board?
The rest of my email was copied and pasted from the report stating that the report is submitted to the Board from the WG, not to the GNSO or ALAC.
Adrian Kinderis
Chief Executive OfficerAusRegistry International Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@ausregistry.com
Web: www.ausregistry.com
- Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint
The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.
From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 10 May 2011 3:51 PM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: Olga Cavalli; Stéphane Van Gelder; council@gnso.icann.org GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Draft message to the Board
you mean the message from ALAC?
2011/5/11 Adrian Kinderis <adrian@ausregistry.com.au>
How did the Board get the report?
Also,
SUMMARY
This report is submitted to the Board and is currently undergoing ALAC ratification.
Adrian Kinderis
From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 10 May 2011 3:38 PM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: Olga Cavalli; Stéphane Van Gelder; council@gnso.icann.org GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Draft message to the Board
Hello,
@Adrian I puzzled with you claiming that " report was sent directly to the board from the WG", that is false claim and fact, the WG only sent the report to (in 8th and not 9th as it is written in the draft letter) its chartering organizations and explained that clearly in my message to Stephane, so there is no need to rush if you assumed the former.
I am also going to submit a motion soon for GNSO council consideration.
I agree with Olga that there is no unanimous support and we need to vote on that.
Regards
Rafik
2011/5/11 Adrian Kinderis <adrian@ausregistry.com.au>
We have to rush because I assume the Board is reviewing the report having been sent it directly from the WG.
It is important that they understand the report has not been reviewed not approved by the Council.
These are facts. Why can’t they be stated?
Adrian Kinderis
From: Olga Cavalli [mailto:olgacavalli@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 10 May 2011 3:23 PM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: Stéphane Van Gelder; council@gnso.icann.org GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Draft message to the Board
Hi,
Should we have a vote on this?
I do not understand why we have to rush, could some one clarify this to me?
Best
Olga2011/5/10 Adrian Kinderis <adrian@ausregistry.com.au>
Olga,
Maybe I can help, I believe SVG means that, of all the responses to the list so far, all have agreed with my statement and request to send a letter to the Board.
Adrian Kinderis
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
Sent: Tuesday, 10 May 2011 3:09 PM
To: Stéphane Van Gelder
Cc: council@gnso.icann.org GNSOSubject: Re: [council] Draft message to the Board
Hi Stéphane,
my apologies if I missed some emails, I was travelling.
Could you please clarify "unanimous support"?
Many thanks and regards
Olga2011/5/10 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>
Councillors,
In response to Adrian's suggestion, which so far has met with unanimous support, I have drafted this short email to the Board. Please let me have your thoughts and any suggested edits. Rafik, as JAS WG co-chair and Council liaison, I think it is crucial that we have your input before sending any message to the Board.
Thanks,
Stéphane
Dear Peter,
On May 10, the Board was sent the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group ( JAS WG)'s Second Milestone Report by ALAC. We understand that this report has not yet been approved by ALAC.
The GNSO Council wishes to highlight the fact that it has not approved this report yet either. In fact, the Council has only just received it. The report was sent to us by the co-chairs of the JAS working group on May 9, 2011.
As one of the two chartering organisations of the JAS WG, the GNSO is keen to ensure that the Board understands the nature of the report that it has been sent, and the circumstances under which it received it.
I would be grateful therefore, if you could convey the GNSO Council's message to the Board.
Best,
Stéphane Van Gelder
GNSO Council Chair