Alan, Note that Glen's message said, "The call will be open to observers and alternates if Council members cannot attend." I would conclude from that that an alternate could attend if you are unable to do so yourself. But I think that saying 'open to observers and alternates' could easily be interpreted more broadly. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 4:56 PM To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan
Based on Glen's announcement that the meeting was open to observers, I have already issues an invitation. I am expecting Cheryl, Sebastian and perhaps Danny.
I take it that you now want me to withdraw that?
Alan
At 13/01/2009 04:45 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
I was asked whether this meeting was open to observers as the previous meetings had been. Since we are focusing mainly on issues related to possible variance between the GNSO Council recommendations and the implementation plan and on our recent motions, I thought it better that it be essentially an extended council meeting - but one without motions. In that respect I suggest we follow the practice we have followed with other such extended council meetings, most recently wih the Whois study DT, and allow for substitutions but not observers. The meeting will be recorded and that recording will be available to all.
thanks
a.
On 12 Jan 2009, at 11:29, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi
Based on what I have heard spoken of so far, the following
is a draft
agenda for the New gTLD meeting on 15 January.
1 - Discuss areas at variance with GNSO policy principles, recommendations and guidelines. Possible areas include, i.a.:
- Principle G: Do the review criteria infringe on freedom of expression - Recommendation 1: Are the price levels discriminatory? - Recommendation 2: Extent of confusing similarity - Recommendation 5: Reserved names issues - geographic - 2 char IDN - Recommendation 17: what is the clear compliance and sanctions process? - IG B: Recommended cost based fees with different applicants paying different fees. Are these fees really cost based? Are some applicants subsidizing other applicants? - IG F: Board resolution process was recommended instead of Auction - IG O: Are there any plans for a fee reduction schedule for gTLS applicants from economies classified as least developed? - Others?
2 - Discuss the motions we passed vis a vis new gTLDs - introducion of idn tlds - Implementation guideline (IG) E
3 - Discuss the comments received
4 - Discuss follow-up process to this meeting