Re: [ga] Re: Documentation request

["Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@digitel.net>]

Title: Message

this would be the question i would pose as well

 

ken stubbs

----- Original Message -----

From: Peter de Blanc

To: 'Philip Sheppard' ; DannyYounger@cs.com ; ga@dnso.org

Cc: gcarey@carey.cl ; aaus@MPAA.org ; cchicoine@thompsoncoburn.com ; Paul.Kane@reacto.com ; erica.roberts@bigpond.com ; kstubbs@dninet.net ; vany@sdnp.org.pa ; yjpark@myepark.com ; mueller@syracuse.edu ; greg_ruth@yahoo.com ; tony.ar.holmes@bt.com ; harris@cabase.org.ar ; ck@nrm.se ; Richard.Tindal@neulevel.biz ; rcochetti@verisign.com ; grant.forsyth@clear.co.nz ; mcade@att.com ; orobles@nic.mx ; Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr

Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 9:19 AM

Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Greetings:

 

Please refer to Article 3, and section 3 (d) of the ICANN bylaws at

http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI

 

The (proposed) new constituency must self-organize, probably produce a document containing at least a statement of purpose, or mission statement, and some basic bylaws defining membership.

 

Once the (proposed) new constituency has self-organized, it may petition the Board for recognition.

 

My question is, has such self-organization, and production of documents taken place?

 

Peter de Blanc

 

(Please note that I support the idea of some kind of individual domain name holder's constituency)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:21 AM
To: DannyYounger@cs.com; ga@dnso.org
Cc: gcarey@carey.cl; aaus@MPAA.org; cchicoine@thompsoncoburn.com; Paul.Kane@reacto.com; erica.roberts@bigpond.com; kstubbs@dninet.net; vany@sdnp.org.pa; yjpark@myepark.com; mueller@syracuse.edu; greg_ruth@yahoo.com; tony.ar.holmes@bt.com; harris@cabase.org.ar; ck@nrm.se; Richard.Tindal@neulevel.biz; rcochetti@verisign.com; grant.forsyth@clear.co.nz; mcade@att.com; orobles@nic.mx; Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr; pdeblanc@usvi.net
Subject: [ga] Re: Documentation request

Danny,

thank you for your reply to my request for a document summarising the rationale and level of support for an individual's constituency. I can understand your temptation in continuing to copy in the entire NC but would urge you to stop unless those individuals actively ask to be kept directly informed. A copy to nc-review would seem more appropriate.

 

You cited general references to the CONCEPT in the report of WG review with which I am familiar. You also cite a proposal on the CONCEPT made by Karl Auerbach. Did this ever get to a vote? You also cite various votes to questions of CONCEPT in each case with votes cast numbering from around 20 to 90 persons.

 

What would be useful is to know if there has been a SUBSTANTIVE proposal addressing the key issue of representation, and if so what level of support that proposal received.

 

Philip