[ga] MISSING DOCUMENTS - ICANN is evading these questions
Title: Help 3rd e-mail sent to Dan Halloran about MISSING
DOCUMENTS:
Dear Mr Halloran (and colleagues at
ICANN)
I still have not had any reply concerning the
MISSING DOCUMENTS : "Proof of Concept Evaluation reports" from Afilias, in
accordance with Appendix U of the .info Agreement with ICANN.
I would like to ask more urgently and specifically
these straightforward and reasonable questions:
1. Have Afilias, as of 21st August 2002, submitted
the documents required of them under Appendix U?
2. Given the community's need for these documents
if it is to participate in the NewTLD Evaluation Process in an informed manner,
why has ICANN not published these documents?
3. According to the Agreement, these documents were
only to be kept private for a limited time. In various cases (and the majority)
the time for these documents to be kept private has expired (indeed
significantly). Can ICANN detail the state-of-play for each document and
section (as outlined in Appendix U)?
4. Why has no-one from ICANN responded to my polite
request concerning these MISSING DOCUMENTS?
As I explained in my two previous mails, these
Evaluation reports are central documents for all constituencies who wish to
participate in the NewTLD Evaluation Process. I have been participating for over
a year on ICANN's own NewTLDs Evaluation Forum (and its predecessor)
and am recognised as having a detailed knowledge of the process and its
impact, from the user/registrant point of view. I am also an elected @large
representative and a regular participant in the GA. I feel my
request deserves a serious response.
These key DOCUMENTS are, as of now, MISSING
and UNACCOUNTED FOR. I feel sure you can
account for them by answering my enquiry.
I should like to ask Nancy Victory, as an honorable
party engaged in reviewing ICANN's reforms, whether she feels that ICANN's
silences in matters like these indicate the undertaking for
greater openness (and responsiveness?) made to her recently by Mr Stuart
Lynn? Furthermore, how can various constituencies in ICANN participate in
evaluating and developing policy, and seeking consensus, if they are not even
able to view key documents in the "Proof of Concept" evaluation process?
Besides, these were documents which were expressly not intended to remain
private (stated clearly in Appendix U) and there can be little integrity in the
Proof of Concept process if they either (a) haven't been submitted, or (b) are
being withheld.
My request is formally and politely made to you,
and I request your kind attention and professional response (including
acknowledgement of the receipt of this and my previous e-mails).
Kind regards
Richard Henderson
|