Re: [wg-review] Re: [Comment Please] Set timetable again or Review WG

["YJ Park (MINC)" <yjpark@minc.org>]

> Specifically what do you want us to do?

Due to my disconnection for two days to Review WG,
I have been quite confused about small discussion among those four
candidates
about Review WG's workload designation or volunteer to answer to the NC
review task force's and WG members' own questionaire.

Who is doing what?

I have been also confused about election process which I have thought
Co-chair should be decided by WG members instead of among those of you
to have co-chair's own legetimacy.

Or to avoid such one-man system, this group can opt to have multiple leaders
who have different views, if possible. However, this principle should be
decided by this group, too.

> PS. I do not really believe this to be usefull at all as most of the
people
> involved had to learn about the DNSO, that the GA has not even been
> discussed and the mess you describe within the NC does not live much hope
> something improves. But tell us what you want.

Without such hope for the future, there is no use to work on this process.
We all here to strive to make DNSO workable!!

GA will be a forum for people to discuss substantial things.
NC will listen to what people discuss and what they suggest.

Thanks,
YJ

>
> At 17:31 13/01/01, YJ Park \(MINC\) wrote:
> >WG members and four WG leaders,
> >
> >Since this group is working on review process,
> >every process even within this group should meet the rules and criteria.
> >There should be no exception on this.
> >
> >Therefore, it is almost impossible for this group to have position paper
> >submission(only formaly done by registrar.com regarding dnso quality)
> >and to reach "consensus" process or position-setting process with given
> >time by NC.
> >
> >Unfortunately, many NC members are quiet about this issue and some
> >members want this group to give its promised report to NC by Jan. 15.
> >I have seen NC extend its due date in several cases earlier, therefore,
> >there should be no problem.
> >
> >[Jan 15. Designated report from Review WG Chair to NC Review TF.]
> >
> >Promise is promise!!
> >As promised, the Review WG (observation) report will be delivered to
> >NC review task force on Jan 15 with condition that Review WG is going
> >to submit its progress report on Feb 20.
> >
> >========================================
> >Feb 9 - 14.  Review WG Position Paper Submission
> >Feb 14 - 19 Review WG Position Paper Comment Period.
> >Feb 20         Review WG Position Paper Delivered to NC
> >========================================
> >
> >Since this Jan 15's observation report is not going to be public position
> >of  this Review working group, I am seeking your understanding on
> >submitting this report with bunch of papers or commments or even poll
> >results made in this group.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >YJ
> >
> >FYI. [Appendix 1] The first timetable of Review Working Group.
> >
> >Dec. 19 - 22 :
> >Review WG was formed by NC and its press release
> >have been prepared.
> >
> >Dec. 23 - 26 :
> >The press release was announced through icann-announce list
> >on Dec. 23 and WG members had its brief and informal introduction
> >session.
> >
> >Dec. 27 - Jan 4:
> >Ten topics with questions from NC Review TF was circulated.
> >Three topics has been added by WG members including IDNH,
> >sTLD and GA chair election. However most discussion has been
> >focused on Constituencies - Structure - so far.
> >
> >Jan 5 - Jan 9:
> >
> >Call for Position Paper on each topic, 13 topics until Jan 9.
> >
> >Jan 10 - Jan 11:
> >
> >Comments from members on the presented position papers.
> >
> >Jan 12 - Jan 14:
> >
> >Progress Report will be submitted to this group and will have
> >another consulation from this group before it is presented to NC.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html