- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

ICANN | 2008 ICANN Nominating Committee Announces Selections
by Ross Rader Sept. 8, 2008

Sept. 8, 2008

Hello everyone. The 2008 nomcomm appointments have been made public. I hope that these selections benefit ICANN and this community. I really appreciate having had the opportunity to serve the NA-RALO and At-large community this past year. http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-05sep08-en.htm --- /ross

7 15

Form 990
by Danny Younger Sept. 7, 2008

Sept. 7, 2008

Dear Kevin, At the May Special Meeting of the ICANN Board of Directors, it was noted by John Jeffrey that the ICANN CFO intends to post Form 990 on the ICANN website after annotations are made to explain it to the community. As it has been 3 months since this comment was made and Form 990 (annotated or otherwise) does not yet appear to be posted, might we ask when we can expect to see the Form on the ICANN website? Thanks, Danny Younger

1 0

Form 990
by Danny Younger Sept. 7, 2008

Sept. 7, 2008

Hi Nick, As I cannot find an email address for the ICANN CFO, could I ask you to get us an update on the following: "Raimundo Beca also confirmed that the United States' Internal Revenue Service Form 990 was filed on time. John Jeffrey noted that the ICANN CFO intends to post it on the ICANN website, after annotations are made to explain it to the community." http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-29may08.htm In short, when can we expect to see Form 990 posted? It really shouldn't take 3 months just to provide some annotations... Thanks, Danny

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] This whole resignation thing
by Brendler, Beau Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

Thanks for your explanation. You wrote: >I did not say that the NARALO was calling for your resignation - I said I had seen one post on the mailing list saying that - nothing more.< I haven't listened to the audio recording and frankly, would rather spend time doing more productive things -- and so, probably won't. But I venture to say that in the "hot seat," in that context, there's not a lot of difference. And I think you understand that. I love to ask tough questions, I don't mind taking them, either. I hope I answered this one. This is politics, after all. Let's move on. Beau -----Original Message----- From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 4:33 PM To: Brendler, Beau; NA Discuss Cc: Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Evan Leibovitch Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] This whole resignation thing Beau, I think that you did misinterpret. And the question did not come from any bias. Wendy got off easier this time because I subjected her to it last year, and we have discussed several issues one-on-one, so I had less need with her. I specifically made reference to "formal" ALAC activities, and perhaps even to teleconferences (which you understood based on the your reply). Staff had distributed a spreadsheet where your satisfaction of the ALAC performance rules was flagged as "Not Achieved" (a fate I narrowly missed over that same 6-month period by just one meeting). I have already gone on record a few times as saying we needed to revise those rules to track SUBSTANTIVE contributions and not mere attendance. In our current rules, if someone had missed *one* ALS vote, they would have failed in that category! And if they attend everything and never say or do anything they are labelled superb. I did not say that the NARALO was calling for your resignation - I said I had seen one post on the mailing list saying that - nothing more. And I led off the question saying that you had made substantive contributions in various areas (which not unreasonably were also aligned with your real-life work activities). The question was quite straight. You did not manage to make a fair percentage of the ALAC teleconferences in the last while, and I was asking why a substantially larger number of events would not be a problem in the future. Although I will no doubt get into trouble for trying to paraphrase you, my take on your answer was that you missed some meetings because they were often a waste of time. And I agreed. I am a bit troubled that you have not been more active in trying to fix that problem instead of walking away from it, but that is just my personal feeling. I normally treat volunteers very respectfully and with sensitivity. In this case, you are putting your name up for an important position within the ALAC world, and I do not think it appropriate to side-step issues because they are awkward to bring up. Alan At 05/09/2008 02:59 PM, Brendler, Beau wrote: >Dear NA: > >This morning in the board liaison candidacy discussion, Alan Greenberg >asked me a question that went something like, "considering the NA >region is calling for your resignation because you don't have time for >your ALAC duties as they currently stand, why should we vote for you >for board liaison?" > >Putting aside the board liaison candidacy thing for a moment, I need to >get clear on something. > >If I misinterpreted the question (I don't think I did), feel free to >ignore this note. If Alan's question comes from some sort of bias for >Wendy's candidacy versus mine, well hey, that's OK, I'm a big boy and I >don't really see that as a problem. The ALAC will vote for whom it >votes. > >But if the NA-RALO is indeed asking for my resignation, I would have >appreciated the opportunity to address it in another forum beforehand, >or would have appreciated hearing it directly from the elected chair of >the NA-RALO rather than from a nomcom appointee. >Or, for that matter, I would have appreciated hearing about it from the >chair of the ALAC. If it's indeed the case, you'll have my resignation >in 24 hours -- (914) 378-2018 until 5:30 EST. It would be great to know >before the weekend starts, so I can devote time I would have spent on >ICANN matters to other things. > >Some final advice: If you're looking to attract good volunteers to work >in this community, rethink your processes. > >Regards, > >Beau Brendler > >*********************************************************************** >***** >******** >SCANNED > >*********************************************************************** >***** >******** > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-list >s.icann.org > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ *** Scanned **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] This whole resignation thing
by Alan Greenberg Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

Beau, I think that you did misinterpret. And the question did not come from any bias. Wendy got off easier this time because I subjected her to it last year, and we have discussed several issues one-on-one, so I had less need with her. I specifically made reference to "formal" ALAC activities, and perhaps even to teleconferences (which you understood based on the your reply). Staff had distributed a spreadsheet where your satisfaction of the ALAC performance rules was flagged as "Not Achieved" (a fate I narrowly missed over that same 6-month period by just one meeting). I have already gone on record a few times as saying we needed to revise those rules to track SUBSTANTIVE contributions and not mere attendance. In our current rules, if someone had missed *one* ALS vote, they would have failed in that category! And if they attend everything and never say or do anything they are labelled superb. I did not say that the NARALO was calling for your resignation - I said I had seen one post on the mailing list saying that - nothing more. And I led off the question saying that you had made substantive contributions in various areas (which not unreasonably were also aligned with your real-life work activities). The question was quite straight. You did not manage to make a fair percentage of the ALAC teleconferences in the last while, and I was asking why a substantially larger number of events would not be a problem in the future. Although I will no doubt get into trouble for trying to paraphrase you, my take on your answer was that you missed some meetings because they were often a waste of time. And I agreed. I am a bit troubled that you have not been more active in trying to fix that problem instead of walking away from it, but that is just my personal feeling. I normally treat volunteers very respectfully and with sensitivity. In this case, you are putting your name up for an important position within the ALAC world, and I do not think it appropriate to side-step issues because they are awkward to bring up. Alan At 05/09/2008 02:59 PM, Brendler, Beau wrote: >Dear NA: > >This morning in the board liaison candidacy discussion, Alan >Greenberg asked me a question that went something like, "considering >the NA region is calling for your resignation because you don't have >time for your ALAC duties as they currently stand, why should we >vote for you for board liaison?" > >Putting aside the board liaison candidacy thing for a moment, I need >to get clear on something. > >If I misinterpreted the question (I don't think I did), feel free to >ignore this note. If Alan's question comes from some sort of bias >for Wendy's candidacy versus mine, well hey, that's OK, I'm a big >boy and I don't really see that as a problem. The ALAC will vote for >whom it votes. > >But if the NA-RALO is indeed asking for my resignation, I would have >appreciated the opportunity to address it in another forum >beforehand, or would have appreciated hearing it directly from the >elected chair of the NA-RALO rather than from a nomcom appointee. >Or, for that matter, I would have appreciated hearing about it from >the chair of the ALAC. If it's indeed the case, you'll have my >resignation in 24 hours -- (914) 378-2018 until 5:30 EST. It would >be great to know before the weekend starts, so I can devote time I >would have spent on ICANN matters to other things. > >Some final advice: If you're looking to attract good volunteers to >work in this community, rethink your processes. > >Regards, > >Beau Brendler > >**************************************************************************** >******** >SCANNED > >**************************************************************************** >******** > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------

1 0

This whole resignation thing
by Brendler, Beau Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

Dear NA: This morning in the board liaison candidacy discussion, Alan Greenberg asked me a question that went something like, "considering the NA region is calling for your resignation because you don't have time for your ALAC duties as they currently stand, why should we vote for you for board liaison?" Putting aside the board liaison candidacy thing for a moment, I need to get clear on something. If I misinterpreted the question (I don't think I did), feel free to ignore this note. If Alan's question comes from some sort of bias for Wendy's candidacy versus mine, well hey, that's OK, I'm a big boy and I don't really see that as a problem. The ALAC will vote for whom it votes. But if the NA-RALO is indeed asking for my resignation, I would have appreciated the opportunity to address it in another forum beforehand, or would have appreciated hearing it directly from the elected chair of the NA-RALO rather than from a nomcom appointee. Or, for that matter, I would have appreciated hearing about it from the chair of the ALAC. If it's indeed the case, you'll have my resignation in 24 hours -- (914) 378-2018 until 5:30 EST. It would be great to know before the weekend starts, so I can devote time I would have spent on ICANN matters to other things. Some final advice: If you're looking to attract good volunteers to work in this community, rethink your processes. Regards, Beau Brendler **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********

3 4

Board Liaison Candidates Presentation
by Danny Younger Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

I would like to thank both candidates to the ALAC Board Liaison position for their thoughtful answers at today's session. As both candidates hail from our region, I would ask Nick to provide us with a transcript of the questions and answers so that after consideration and reflection NARALO members can direct their representatives to select the candidate that in our collective view will best serve the needs of the at-large.

3 2

NARALO Teleconference 8 September 1900 UTC
by At-Large Staff Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

Dear all, This is to remind you about the upcoming NARALO teleconference scheduled for Monday September 8th at 1900 UTC. A tentative agenda has been added to the meeting page: https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?08_september_2008 Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Comment Period
by Danny Younger Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

Note from the GNSO Secretariat: Dear All, Each constituency is invited to provide input to the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Set A PDP. Please use the attached template, which can also be directly viewed on the Wiki, when providing constituency input. https://st.icann.org/irtp_jun08_pdp-wg/index.cgi?template_for_constituency_… The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Set A PDP workspace is at: https://st.icann.org/irtp_jun08_pdp-wg/index.cgi?irtp_part_a_pdp_wg_pdp_jun… The deadline for submission of the constituency statements is 3 October 2008. https://st.icann.org/irtp_jun08_pdp-wg/index.cgi?irtp_part_a_draft_working_… Constituency statements should be submitted to the working group list: <gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08@xxxxxxxxx> NLT COB on 3 October 2008. [replace the xxxx with icann.org] Marika Konings, Policy Director, is the ICANN staff person supporting the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Set A PDP.

1 0

Where is the promised Comprehensive Review of ICANN Accreditation Processes?
by Danny Younger Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

Source: http://www.knujon.com/news.html Phantom Registrars In investigating the 48 Directi-owned Registrars with questionable locations, we reported facts. The address used by many of these Registrars: "14525 SW Millikan Way Beaverton, OR 97005-2343" is the address of a mail forwarding service called Earthclassmail. According to Directi, the listed companies are registered in Delaware, but not in Oregon or New York as listed in the ICANN Directory. Directi is headquartered in Mumbai, India. KnujOn feels that any company given so much responsibility over the Internet should fully disclose where they are located, but this is apparently not an ICANN requirement. Indeed, Stacy Burnette, director of contractual compliance at ICANN, said the organization is satisfied the registrars are incorporated in the location listed in their application. Telephone numbers in the contact information need not correspond to the location of incorporation, she said. ICANN doesn't require registrars to publicly disclose their place of incorporation. To which KnujOn says: Huh? So, as the expression goes, don't hate the player hate the game. Directi merely acquired these accreditations by ICANN's own rules. Summary: One address in the application, a second address disclosed to the public. Read this line again: "ICANN doesn't require registrars to publicly disclose their place of incorporation." How does this figure into ICANN's mission to be an open and transparent organization? "Telephone numbers in the contact information need not correspond to the location of incorporation". How can there be any accountability? This situation is upside-down. Registrants are required to list their valid contact information, but the Registrars who sponsor their domains are not.

4 7