Tim - I would offer a friendly amendment to your language to
keep it within the more narrow relm proposed by Ross, as follows:
"... that any officer, employee, or
board director of any ICANN recognized
gTLD registry
in the possession of or with access to registry
>Proprietary Information >(http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-06mar01.htm#A-
>3.1 in the case of GNR) or Registry Sensitive Information
>(http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-06mar01.htm#A-
not be permitted to participate in this constituency at any level, in any
capacity, for a period of one year since holding such position
and that our by-laws be amended to reflect this."
Regards, Elana
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim
Ruiz [mailto:tim@godaddy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:29 PM
To: ross@tucows.com; wessorh@ar.com
Cc:
registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars]
PersonalNames.com
What about something like this:
"... that any officer, employee, or board director of any
ICANN recognized
gTLD registry not be permitted to
participate in this constituency at any
level, in any
capacity, for a period of one year since holding such position
and that our by-laws be amended to reflect this."
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: Ross
Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:36 AM
To: tim@godaddy.com; 'Rick Wesson'
Cc:
registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars]
PersonalNames.com
> Like it or not, there will never again be a clear
distinction
> between registrars and registries. We
are all in this to make
> a profit. While I don't
want people involved on this list, or
> in the RC,
that have intimate, confidential knowledge of our
>
businesses, I also don't want to preclude a legitimate party
> from being able to participate.
Tim - if this has been lost in the exchange somewhere, let me
clarify
for the record - this is *precisely* the
sentiment and intent of the
motion. I believe that it
strikes an appropriate balance between these
two
competing dynamics to the benefit of the constituency.
If there is a clearer way to word it, I am open to friendly
amendments
of the motion.
-rwr
"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore
like an
idiot."
- Steven
Wright
Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/blog
> -----Original Message-----
>
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org
> [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]
On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Wednesday, January
29, 2003 11:46 AM
> To: Rick Wesson; Ross Wm.
Rader
> Cc: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
>
>
>
Rick,
>
> >
completely within our capabilities to clearly separate
> registrars from
> > those that work
for registries
>
> That
I don't think I agree with. If that is where this is
> leading then I would object. I don't want this list, and
the
> RC that represents my business interests,
captured by a group
> of mostly small registrars
promoting their own agenda.
>
> Like it or not, there will never again be a clear
distinction
> between registrars and registries. We
are all in this to make
> a profit. While I don't
want people involved on this list, or
> in the RC,
that have intimate, confidential knowledge of our
>
businesses, I also don't want to preclude a legitimate party
> from being able to participate.
>
> I see no member of the RC or this
list who I would object to
> participating.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
-----Original Message-----
> From:
owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Rick Wesson
> Sent:
Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:09 AM
> To: Ross Wm.
Rader
> Cc: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
>
>
>
>
> Ross,
>
> I support this position. I believe
that it is completely
> within our capabilities to
clearly separate registrars from
> those that work
for registries and to have this constituency
>
membership only reflect registrars intrests.
>
> best,
>
> -rick
>
>
> On Wed,
29 Jan 2003, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
>
> > I would like to formally move that any
representative of any ICANN
> > recognized gTLD
registry in the possession of or with access to
>
> registry Proprietary Information
> >
> (http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-
> 06mar01.htm#A-
> > 3.1 in
the case of GNR) or Registry Sensitive Information
> >
> (http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-
> 06mar01.htm#A-
> > 3.2
also in the case of GNR) not be permitted to
>
participate in this
> > constituency at any
level, in any capacity, for a period of
> one
year
> > since the last receipt of such
information and that our by-laws be
> > amended
to reflect this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ross Wm. Rader
> > Tucows
Inc.
> >
>
>
> >
>
>
> >
> > -----
Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael D.
Palage" <michael@palage.com>
> > To:
<registrars@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday,
January 29, 2003 8:26 AM
> > Subject:
[registrars] PersonalNames.com
> >
> >
> > > As
PersonalNames is now an ICANN accredited registrar they are
> > > eligible
> to
> > > subscribe to the registrar mailing list, and
they have asked to be
> added.
> > To
> > > date PersonalNames
has not paid any membership dues so it is not
>
eligible
> > to
>
> > vote in any constituency matters.
> >
>
> > > Yesterday there were several posts
asking the Registrar Executive
> >
Committee
> > > to schedule a call with
PersonalNames. Although the Executive
> > >
Committee stands ready to assist the constituency in this
> matter, I
> > > believe
that
> > some
> >
> dialogue between PersonalNames and the rest of the registrar
> > > community
> >
might
> > > make any such call more
productive.
> > >
> > > The only PersonalNames representative that has asked to
join the
> registrar
>
> > mailing list to date is Hakon Haugnes.
>
> >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Michael
D. Palage
> > >
>
> >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>