RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE

[Roberto Gaetano <Roberto.Gaetano@etsi.fr>]

Joop,

You wrote:

> In view of the fact that there is little time to rewrite a balanced
> position paper and alternative clauses in your bylaws, will you consider
> the positions and comments that have been made so far in the DNSO discuss
> list?
> 
There's an explicit address for comments and proposals (proposals@dnso.org),
but obviously the comments on the open list will be taken into account.

> Will they be incorporated in your draft revision? 
> How will this be decided? With a vote of all discuss@dnso.org list
> participants?
> 
Tough question.
The timescale (deadline for application: Feb. 5) implies that we will not
have enough time for a public poll (also because I don't see why it should
be limited to one single list), but on the other hand I don't see how we can
possibly present an application that does not have enough support.

My proposal is to encourage comments on the substance of the draft (up to
now the great part of the traffic on the lists was on the question "Is
DNSO.ORG open?", rather than "What does the DNSO.ORG propose?"), and somehow
we will tally the opinions, then come to a final wrap-up (the tentative date
is Jan. 22) for a final version, with short verification on the list(s).

Of course, if the participation in terms of comments is close to zip, and
attendance to the wrap-up meeting is the people we had before (plus, maybe,
INTA), then the whole process is not worthed the effort, and we may as well
go to ICANN with a set of separate applications, and lose some more time
(which is exactly what some people asked Santa Claus for).

Regards
Roberto