[ga] Re: [wg-review] WG-Review continuation

[Derek Conant <dconant@dnsga.org>]

Domain Name System General Assembly (DNSGA)
http://www.dnsga.org

There is the DNSGA.  However, it appears that some participants here cannot
see that it has been proven time and time again that a workgroup cannot solve
the significant problems at issue, and that are of topic, from within ICANN or
the DNSO itself.  This appears to be the case and it can be shown that ICANN
and the DNSO have inhibited productive workgroup processes every step of the
way.

After all of the DNSO and DNSO-GA WG efforts, complaints and frustration from
participants concerning the ICANN, DNSO and Names Counsel processes . . . , it
is almost laughable to see that some participants here have not figured out
that ICANN must be approached by an outside organization.  This appears to be
the only way a workgroup can effectively propose their ideas and work product.

Workgroups working from within ICANN and the DNSO have proven to be not
effective.  It appears to me that ICANN has a preconceived plan and it will do
what it has already planned to do unless an outside workgroup can propose to
the U.S. Government ideas and work product that can offset the ICANN proposed
agreements and policy changes.

The DNSGA has a channel to the U.S. Government and its new Administration.
The DNSGA will submit its report and filing regarding ICANN's role and conduct
in the domain name industry to the U.S. Government in May 2001.  The said
channel will consider and evaluate the DNSGA's report and filing.  The DNSGA
report and its claims therein will have merit and show accurate, or else the
report will not be given much weight to offset ICANN's proposed agreements and
policy changes in September 2001.

The DNSGA is taking an active role in properly proposing its workgroup work
products.  The DNSGA invites Internet stakeholders and interested parties to
participate in the process of developing the DNSGA Report to the U.S.
Government.

The DNSGA invites Internet stakeholders and interested parties to subscribe to
its mailing list and forums (http://www.dnsga.org/lists_archives) and to
propose other workgroup forums to solve DNS related issues.

I believe that it is time to stop chasing our tails and that it is time to
consolidate in an effort that moves forward in a way that will get the job
done.

With all of this, however, it will be interesting to watch the DNSGA Report
develop at:  http://dnsga.org/icann/dnsga_draft_report-may01

Derek Conant
DNSGA President and Chairman

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> Dear Sotiris,
> this WG-Review ML comes to an end. It is urgent to transfer it to some
> other place. I am surpsied that as a Chair you did not send us mails to
> tell us where this ML will continue as the NC suggestion to use the GA is
> not inapproprrate and an obvious policy move.
>
> Please all the participants on line today advise on what to do.
>
> 1. has one of you the list of all the Members of this WG-Review
> 2. has one of you a host of this list (I have a free non commercial one at
> hand, I am preparing to transfer several icann related/ISOC lists, but I
> never really used yet)
>
> Take care. Jefsey
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html