Danny: I'm afraid you are thinking of something else. As you will clearly see from the top of the page, in the introductory note, at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/correspondence/correspondence-14sep.htm, the RAA amendments statement was approved by ALAC in a vote which was quorate. If you find deficiencies in the statement which should be rectified, or wish to propose specific next steps, I'm sure any proposals you would make on the subject would be read with interest, especially as you were one of the drafters of the statement itself. As you know, you are the resident expert in the community on this subject. On 24/11/2008 23:46, "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote: Nick, Beau drafted a Statement and that Statement couldn't be ratified owing to a lack of quorum. Thereafter Staff put up a seven day ratification vote on the Statement. Only 9 members bothered to vote. In keeping with ALAC tradition there was no substantive discussion of the issues therein. Nowhere in the Statement does it indicate what the ALAC proposes as next steps in the process. The Statement fails to indicate which amendments are acceptable and which are deficient or what processes should be used to implement the proposed amendements. In short, the Statement fails to offer sufficient guidance to the ALAC's GNSO liaison. Yes, these matters could be discussed at tomorrow's ALAC meeting, but the aganeda seems to be filled with navel-gazing exercises that will doubtless eat up the allotted meeting time. --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Nick Ashton-Hart <Nick.Ashton-Hart@icann.org> wrote:
From: Nick Ashton-Hart <Nick.Ashton-Hart@icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Agenda To: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@yahoo.com>, "Robert Guerra" <lists@privaterra.info>, "Beau Brendler" <brenbe@consumer.org>, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Cc: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 4:57 PM For the sake of clarity, the most recent ALAC statement on the RAA Amendments was ratified on 14th September of this year. As you were one of the contributors to the drafting, Danny, and considering how recently this was approved, I'm surprised that you are unaware of what the ALAC's position is.
You may read the statement at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/correspondence/correspondence-14sep.htm.
On 24/11/2008 16:15, "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,
As I, and doubtless others, have no idea what position the ALAC has adopted with respect to the RAA amendments, could we trouble you to articulate the official position, and the specific actions that the ALAC will support in the GNSO?
Many of us have major issues with a lot of the amendments and we don't want to see these put through on a blanket basis. It's bad enough that Staff is in bed with the registrars; we don't need to have the ALAC pushing an ill-considered program that gives the registrars everything that they want while the views of the rest of the community are routinely ignored.
Danny
--- On Mon, 11/24/08, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Agenda To: dannyyounger@yahoo.com, "Robert Guerra" <lists@privaterra.info>, "Brendler, Beau" <Brenbe@consumer.org> Cc: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 8:19 AM Although not answering any of Danny's questions (but acknowledging where were are today with the RAA amendments being punted to the GNSO), I do note that as ALAC Liaison, I am taking what I hope will be successful action to fast-path the first round of RAA amendments through the GNSO and forwarded to the Board for quick approval.
Alan
At 24/11/2008 07:14 AM, Danny Younger wrote:
Dear North American reps to the ALAC:
The entire point of having a RALO is so that grassroots input may be brought to the attention of the ALAC. There were several items that I raised that have not made it onto the ALAC Agenda for tomorrow's meeting:
1. the failure to inaugurate a comprehensive review of registrar accreditation processes 2. a request for a formal explanation from ICANN Staff as to why (1) invoking the amendments and waivers clause in the RAA may not be pursued and (2) why an updated RAA agreement may not be substituted. As both of these options are permitted by contract, we need to know why Staff has chosen not to pursue this viable course of action. 3. a response to users that have posted comments to the RAA-WG.
As reps for the NARALO you have a duty to raise the issues that have been brought forth by the membership and to place these issues on the agenda if they merit discussion, otherwise there is no point whatsoever in having these RALO structures or an ALAC.
see my orginal comments at
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/20...
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/20...
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
--
Regards,
Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
-- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart