Re: [registrars] By-Laws

["Joyce Lin" <joyce@007names.com>]

Mike,
I agree with you that there are  more urgent issues than by-law at the
moment that we need to wrap up.

Joyce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>
To: <registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 11:24 AM
Subject: [registrars] By-Laws


> Liz,
>
> By all means you can undertake an independent by-law review, however,
there
> are much more pressing issues on the agenda that confront the
constituency,
> transfers, IDNs, deletes, whois (universal & fraudulent data) etc. What I
> find somewhat puzzling is that the two companies that are advocating
by-law
> amendments, Register.com and NameScout, are the ones that took the lead in
> the last by-law review less than a year ago, during and after the
Melbourne
> meeting. At that time I gave the by-laws to Register.com and gave them
> carte-blanch to modify them as they saw fit based upon the discussion
during
> and following the Melbourne meeting.
>
> To me by-laws amendments are a luxury not a necessity, and we lose
> credibility as a constituency screwing around with trivial administrative
> issues while other vital issues go unattended. What good do by-law
> amendments do if there are fewer registrars in our constituency as a
result
> of our failure to address those issues that impact a company's bottom
line.
>
> During the Executive Committee this past Monday I personally advocated
> having you head up the review of the revised VeriSign,ICANN, DOC contracts
> regarding the Audit and 2002 benchmark criteria. Your skills would be
> incredibly value to the constituency in this area, but instead you
continue
> to focus on amending by-laws.
>
> The discussion by the Executive Committee has been you can undertake
> whatever study you want as along as it does not distract/divert the
> constituency from more pressing issues. Asking for volunteers now and
agenda
> time in Ghana just seems like an imprudent use of registrar constituency
> valuable resources.
>
> Therefore I put forward to our Name Council candidates the following
> question: where do you stand on this issue: are by-laws a priority or
should
> they wait. I and the other registrars await your response.
>
> Mike
>
> P.S. Regarding my earlier email, Jeff Neuman is the new Chair of the
> REGISTRY Constituency, not the Registrar Constituency. There seems to have
> been some confusion about this. There is still a lot of unfinished work
that
> me and the rest of the Executive Committee have left to do during your
> current term :-)
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > Behalf Of williams@lizwilliams.net
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 10:03 PM
> > To: registrars@dnso.org
> > Cc: lizwilliams@lizwilliams.net
> > Subject: [registrars] Registrars: By law review
> >
> >
> > All
> >
> > I undertook to provide a framework document that would help us
> > move forward with a review of the RC bylaws.  There is general
> > agreement that this is a necessary process and should be done as
> > a matter of priority.
> >
> > I've attached that document which outlines some suggestions for
> > what to do.  I now, if everyone is OK with that, need a few (3 or
> > 4 at most) volunteers to help me work through each of the by laws
> > to ascertain what changes, amendments, improvements could be made
> > on the following criteria:  strengthening the framework in which
> > the RC operates to make it more efficient and effective and to
> > strengthen the position of the RC with respect to both ICANN and
> > the broader business community.
> >
> > If anyone else is interested, please email me directly.  We can
> > use all the help we can get to draft a comprehensive set of
> > suggestions about the way forward.  I'd be delighted to see
> > someone from Europe and someone from Latin America bring their
> > perspective to this work - it is an open process which benefits
> > from a range of views.
> >
> > I'd expect that the timeframe would look something like:
> >
> > 15 Dec - review of bylaws completed
> >
> > 31 Jan - suggestions for improvements sought and integrated into
> > a comprehensive document
> >
> > 15 Feb - distribute a document for discussion on RC list
> >
> > pre-Ghana meeting - formal discussion of revised document
> >
> >
> > Kind regards - comments and input most welcome.
> >
> > Liz
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > NOCC, http://nocc.sourceforge.net
>
>