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

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

I apologize YJ. But, that was not the intent. I was trying to provide a
working strawman. A starting point for the actual work.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: YJ Park (MINC) [mailto:yjpark@minc.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 1:21 PM
> To: Roeland Meyer; Greg Burton; sotiris@hermesnetwork.com; DPF; Jefsey
> Morfin; wg-review@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-review] [Comment Please] Set timetable again 
> or Review
> WG
> 
> 
> Thank you, Roeland.
> 
> This 11-page paper will be attached in the report as 
> reference document
> submitted by one of Review WG members as alternative 
> suggestion to dnso.
> 
> Thanks,
> YJ
> 
> > My, my my, that *is* an impressive schedule. In fact the 
> only way I can
> see
> > to make it, is that we have a good jump start. Fortunately, 
> I have just
> the
> > thing. I hope all of you have an Acrobat PDF Reader. If you 
> don't. I have
> > HTML, TXT, and Word97 DOC versions (available at
> > http://files.dnso.net/dox/politicks). The ICANN has seen 
> this document
> > already, in Berlin. It was one of the starter documents at the Paris
> meeting
> > (before DNSO existed). It was created, in one week, on the 
> ORSC list.
> Mikki
> > Barry was the editor. This is the same illustrious group 
> that brought you
> > the original NewCo proposal.
> >
> > Note that, there is no mention of formal constituency 
> structures anywhere.
> I
> > don't expect anyone to take this at face value. I submit 
> this in the hopes
> > of getting this group heading ... in ANY direction that 
> does not include a
> > curved trajectory (circles). IMHO, we can do worse than this, for a
> starting
> > point.
> >
> > We don't have a lot of time here.
> >
> > PS. Since y'all didn't object to the pictures, I figured that y'all
> wouldn't
> > object to a PDF file containing substantive content 
> instead. It's not
> > eye-candy, rather ... brain fodder ... I hope.
> >
> > --
> > ROELAND M.J. MEYER
> > Managing Director
> > Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc.
> > TEL: +001 925 373 3954
> > FAX: +001 925 373 9781
> > http://www.mhsc.com
> > mailto: rmeyer@mhsc.com
> >
> >
> > > From: YJ Park (MINC) [mailto:yjpark@minc.org]
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 8:32 AM
> > >
> > > 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