Re: [ga] Transfers - Bankruptcy Clause

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Marilyn and all assembly members,

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> Joanna, can you draft the question/(s) related to the bankruptcy issue and get Dan to submit them.

  With this statement Marilyn, you in part missed Joanna's point which I again
followed up on in support.  That partial point being that Joanna, nor anyone
else should need to "Go Through" or jump any hurdle to get such a question
entered on a legitimate survey.

> Actually all of the TF members are asked to do outreach on the survey so that it is "useful" .. we won't get it all right, but we can,  over a short few days/couple of weeks, get some useful input to modify the survey.

  Ok if you are really interested in outreach than why are you again above stating
that Joanna or anyone else should need to "Go Through" any person or jump
any unnecessary or obstructionist hurdle to get a question recommended or suggested
on such a survey being developed supposedly in the interests of the DNSO
members collectively?

>
>
> Ross is right that this topic didn't come up. BUT, that is the purpose of this outreach. To capture issues like this.

  Yes it is.  ALSO BUT restricting any stakeholder/user from submitting a
question such as the one Joanna has requested and/or suggested is paramount
to LACK of good "Catching"!  >;)

>
>
> I'm not commenting on what changes the TF makes in the survey. I am noting that if you/someone can submit a question, that advances the cause.

  This is wonderful (Sarcasm intended)...  BUT, it does not seem to be
the actual situation if any stakeholder cannot submit directly to the TF
any proposed question to such a survey if outreach is really important...

>
>
> I wonder if it belongs in a separate section in the question: Other issues which concern you. I haven't talked to anyone on the TF, but your emails made me wonder about how to capture this issue more clearly.

  It is usually, but not always better or best to capture a issue by the most direct
means or method that can be mustered.  Therefor a straight forward and blunt
wording of such a question would serve very nicely.  Simple Eh?  Next?!

>
>
> MC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joanna Lane [mailto:jo-uk@rcn.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 8:39 PM
> To: Ross Wm. Rader; DannyYounger@cs.com; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: [ga] Transfers - Bankruptcy Clause
>
> Look Ross, as you very well know, it's nonsense to say "it never came up in
> discussion", it has been raised on this very list only recently.
> Furthermore, you have often accommodated my suggestions in the past when it
> suited, so do not start throwing GA Reps in my face as if there is some
> procedural hurdle I have to pass in order for my request to be acknowledged.
> You, meaning the TF in general, have a duty to establish how Registrants
> feel about all aspects of the Transfer process, and to that end, I have put
> the Task Force on notice that the bankruptcy clause is causing registrants,
> at least the ones I know, some concern.
>
> At the very least, this clause is fuzzy and needs clarifying. *After* some
> discussion, some vague notion arose that it is for the benefit of registrars
> who have large US multinational corporate clients who, they imagine, may
> well run up large bills for unrelated services and therefore this clause
> provides them with some means to recoup possible losses by freezing a
> possible asset under circumstances of a pending bankruptcy, notwithstanding
> that "pending bankruptcy" is not defined in the agreement and certainly
> holds no legal meaning outside the US territory.
>
> Whatever it's purpose, that is of absolutely no concern whatsoever to the
> individual private citizen who registers a domain name, pays his
> registration bill of about $10.00 a year, then wishes to Transfer
> Registrars. From that class of Registrant's perspective, this clause is
> onerous, outrageous and open to abuse. How would you like it if you could
> not change your long distance phone carrier at home unless you provide the
> losing carrier with your social security number and wait for them to confirm
> that you are not pending bankruptcy?
>
> Now, either you address this issue by adding a simple question about the
> bankruptcy clause to the questionnaire, which I am quite willing to help
> you, Dan, or whoever, write, or I will be the first to accuse this Task
> Force of only being prepared to ask questions on issues for which it already
> has the answers from registrars.
>
> Be careful not to shoot yourself in the foot.
>
> Joanna
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 1:32 PM
> To: Joanna Lane; DannyYounger@cs.com; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Survey
>
> It never came up during any discussion. As mentioned previously however, its
> not too late to get additions dropped in via Dan (as the GA constituency
> rep...)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -rwr
>
> Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal
> Realname Keyword: Heathrow Declaration
> Old Skool DNS Address: http://www.byte.org/heathrow
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
> To: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>; <DannyYounger@cs.com>; <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 11:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Survey
>
> > Ross,
> > Where is the question about the bankruptcy clause?
> > Regards,
> > Joanna
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Ross Wm.
> > Rader
> > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:41 PM
> > To: DannyYounger@cs.com; ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Survey
> >
> >
> > Danny - feel free to stand by them, but you incorrect in this case. Not
> > having bothered to check the link that you presented as proof of some
> > conspiracy, I can't talk on an informed basis concerning which draft of
> the
> > survey that you are talking about - however, this document has undergone
> > many revisions - all based on input and criticism put forth by the
> drafting
> > team.
> >
> > At this point, I can't remember who was even responsible for putting
> forward
> > the first draft (I can look it up when I get back to the office if its
> > important) - but I do distinctly remember a number of conversations,
> dozens
> > of emails and a conference call or two between thedrafting team members
> > through the preparation of this draft.
> >
> > The important task now is for the TF to read through this draft, tear it
> > apart (or not) and get it into the hands of users that aren't
> > directly/officially represented in ICANN.
> >
> > -rwr
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <DannyYounger@cs.com>
> > To: <ga@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 12:18 PM
> > Subject: [ga] Re: Survey
> >
> >
> > > Dan Steinberg has asked that I retract the accusation that:
> > >
> > > "Why don't you come clean, and admit that this is solely Ross's
> > > work-product that you modified only in the most minor of ways"
> > >
> > > I stand by my comments, and have produced a side-by-side comparison
> > between
> > > the survey questions created by Ross and the survey questions produced
> by
> > the
> > > "small group of TF members" posted at
> http://www.icannworld.org/survey.htm
> > >
> > > Let the GA decide if anything more than minor modifications are present.
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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