[ga] a more efficient relation with the NC proposed by Philip Sheppard

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

To all Members,
the NC Chair expressed that the NC puts to its agenda whatever is proposed 
to the Intake Committee be a single committed GA Member.

This is actually not a rule as Philip explained that rules are just 
indications, but it is a real step ahead since we have no more voting 
rights. I therefore suggest that instead of proposing motions, we propose 
mails to the intake committee. Since NC Intake Committee does consider 
individual mails, it will certainly consider mails from several. This will 
also permit to keep some order and to be better followed at the GA by the 
mail author.

To start with:
- I suggest Joop prepares a mail about Individual Domain Name Holder 
Constituency I will co-sign?
- May be Eric could prepare a mail I would co-sign too about the Internet 
Users Constituency?
- I wish to see Jun Murai proposition to dialog with "alternative (sic) 
roots" to be acted upon.
- May be someone would propose better than me to have the 9 @large 
directors discussed?
- a clean shirt study and on-going debate about the Internet Security over 
the six coming months, resulting into an ICP-4 Internet Security document 
would positively address Stuart's concerns.
- that the .org TLD Manager could be related neither to NSI nor to the ICANN?
- the icann-sme could jointly propose the SME representation to be discussed.
- thanking Patrick Corliss for his incredible dedication and his 
replacement as an Alt.Chair if he cannot attend the Job anymore.

Jefsey











--
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