Ross, I understand your point from a literal point of view with regard to the GA organization but I would suggest that there is a group of people who participate on the GA list that do exist and are stakeholders in gTLDs. I believe any group of stakeholders may submit a request to the GNSO. That said though, I do agree with you that it would be wise to consider the request in the overall context of GNSO reform that will likely occur in the near future. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ross Rader Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 11:23 AM To: Avri Doria Cc: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Fwd: GA
Avri -
One small point of clarification - there is no General Assembly (GA) of the GNSO. There is only a mailing list that was used by the former GA of the DNSO which was not shut down when the DNSO was reformed into the GNSO (at which time the General Assembly was eliminated/not carried forward).
Procedurally speaking, there cannot be a request from the GA because it does not exist. If there is a case to be made to recreate the former GA as part of the GNSO, it should be made as part of the GNSO reform discussion and not considered in isolation.
Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
As far as I can tell, we all received a copy of this email from the GA chair. Even so, given the council's responsibility for the GA list, I wanted to send it to the list so that it would be included in our archives.
As an initial approach, I would like to do the following with regard to the GA charter (found at http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm):
- Acknowledge the GA request for consideration of their charter. - Given the council's by-law responsibilities for the moderation of the GA list, encourage them in taking steps to bring order and discipline to the GA list and indicate that they have the council's support in implementing the mailing list rules indicated in Section 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 with the following exception in section 2:
The Announce list is available for official pronouncements only. Emanating from the Secretariat of the NC and/or the Chair of the GA
In this case, the GA-announce list is solely for the use of the GNSO Secretariat for notifying the GA subscribers of GNSO and other ICANN informational items. I do not recommend we make any change at this time in this list's status.
- With regard to the organizational sections of the charter, specifically 6, 8, and 9, indicate that the GA is free to determine its own organizational structure, with the following exceptions in section 8 on elections:
An election is usually held near the end of the term of office for the chair of the General Assembly. The exact time is decided by the outgoing Chair and the Chair of the GNSO.
Nominees for the Chair are sent to an email address provided by the Secretariat.
- With regards to the exceptions listed above, as I read them, they require activity by the council, its chair and secretariat that are not specifically mandated by the by-laws. Since the by-laws governing the GNSO and its governance structure are currently under review by the ICANN Board and its Governance WG, I recommend that we postpone any discussion of these issues until after the GSNO council's new governance situation is settled and understood.
I should also point out that there was an earlier request that the GNSO council create another public discussion list, similar to the GA list but limited to members of existing GNSO constituencies. The request was independently submitted by a member of one GNSO constituency, but was not backed up by that constituency at that time, so I did not take it further. I am bringing it up now for completeness sake.
I suggest that we try and resolve the issue of my response to the GA request over the email list. If there is need I will list this item under AOB in the next agenda, but if there are no objections to the response I suggest or to a modification of the response that we can agree to on the list, perhaps I can go ahead with a response without the need for a specific agenda item.
Thanks a.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@yahoo.com> Date: 18 augusti 2007 12.23.50 EDT To: avri@psg.com Subject: GA
Dear Councilors,
This letter is a formal request from the GNSO General Assembly for recognition of our List Rules and for a directive that we be allowed to interface with those in control of the List in order to implement our new rules.
Our GA list will be more effective in contributing to the business of the GNSO if we are allowed a modicum of self governance. Within the Rules we have provided for reasonable self organization and a disciplinary regimen.
We are mindful of the differences which from time to time may exist between the GA and the existing structural members of ICANN. It is by establishing procedures and restraints that we hope to change those differences into contributions.
Please earnestly consider this request.
Respectfully, Eric Hugh Dierker GA Chair
http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm or http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.txt
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
-- Regards,
Ross Rader Director, Retail Services Tucows Inc.
http://www.domaindirect.com t. 416.538.5492