[council] GA, NC, DNSO ICANN BoD

["Joe Sims" <Joe_Sims@jonesday.com>]

___________________________________________________________________________
____

 This message is intended for the individual or entity named above.  If you
are not the intended
 recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to
others; also please
 notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from
your system.  Thank you.
___________________________________________________________________________
____

Just a point of clarification prompted by Richard's post below:  while it
is certainly true that the Directors selected by the NC will be important
sources of information and insight about the views of the DNSO, and thus it
makes perfectly good sense for them to be as informed as they can be on
those subjects, remember that their obligation now is to ICANN as a whole.
They were selected by the NC, but they do not *represent* the NC.  This is
a point of more technical than practical significance, no doubt, but since
we are still at the beginning, I thought it would be useful to make it
anyway.
---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Sims/JonesDay on 10/26/99 07:54 AM
---------------------------
                                                                  
 (Embedded                                                        
 image moved   Richard Lindsay <richard@interq.ad.jp>             
 to file:      10/26/99 07:46 AM                                  
 pic17473.pcx)                                                    
                                                                  


Extension:

To:   Names Council <council@dnso.org>
cc:    (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
Subject:  [council] GA, NC, DNSO ICANN BoD




Greetings,

We will be discussing the role of the GA and the agenda and
chairs of the NC meetings in LA, I wanted to comment on one other
part of the DNSO;  the ICANN Board of Directors elected from
the DNSO.

It seems to me our 3 reps should attend both the GA (in prominent
seats of honor with the GA Chair) and the Names Council meeting.
These 3 critical gentlemen will be effectively clarifying many of
our recommendations to the ICANN board, it makes sense to me
that they are at least present at meetings as observers in NC
meetings.  Obviously they would not vote on any issues in the
NC, but we may want to clarify points with the ICANN board, and
in a way, I expect our BoD reps to be one tool to achieve this.

Similarly I expect our board reps should be active in the GA.
How this works with the chairman/chairmen etc. I am not sure,
but as far as providing some more structure to the GA in the
form of putting together agenda etc., I would think the ICANN
reps might be able to assist the GA chair.

Am if off track here?  I really think we need to clarify some of
these points before the meetings in LA, lest we experience
Santiago all over again.

Best regards,
Richard
--
_/_/_/interQ Incorporated
_/_/_/System Division
_/_/_/Director and General Manager
_/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay

pic17473.pcx