Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks to all those who have responded. So far, everyone is OK with the 
proposed message. Can I ask that if there is any opposition to me sending this 
message, this be voiced by COB Monday May 23?

Absent strong opposition, I will look to sending the message to PDT on Tuesday.

Thanks,

Stéphane



Le 21 mai 2011 à 05:30, Ching Chiao a écrit :

> 
> OK too.
> 
> On Saturday, May 21, 2011, Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> Ok.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
>> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 11:36 AM
>> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx GNSO
>> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant
>> Support Second Milestone Report
>> 
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> I have now had time to listen to most of the Council call. I would like
>> to congratulate Jeff on doing such a good job of chairing the meeting in
>> my stead, not that I had any doubt ;) My thanks Jeff for stepping in
>> like that.
>> 
>> I have listened to the Council discussions on the JAS. Let me add just a
>> few words to your discussions. It is very clear to me that the Council
>> chair may send an information message to the Board if he or she feels it
>> is required. The onus here is on the word "information". The message
>> should be factual only and contain nothing which could be construed as
>> opinion. I was very comfortable with sending such a message to the Board
>> in this case. However, once we started discussing, it became clear that
>> some thought the proposed message not to be only informational. Also,
>> one Councillor called for a vote. That being the case, I did not feel I
>> could just brush these concerns aside and instead I proposed a vote on
>> the list.
>> 
>> The results of that vote are as follows: 6 in favor of message version
>> A, 7 in favor of message version B and 1 in favor of "none of the
>> above". To that tally we should add my vote, which would be for version
>> B.
>> 
>> So where does this leave us. Well, from both your discussions during the
>> Council meeting and the vote and the discussion on the list, it is clear
>> that there is an overwhelming majority for at least one thing: sending a
>> message (Andrei's vote is really the only one that goes against this).
>> In that regard, I concur with Jonathan who said on the call that we've
>> probably done too much work on this already to just not do anything now.
>> 
>> As for what message to send, that is not quite so easy. The Council is
>> split, with a small majority leaning towards version B. On the call you
>> all discussed adding the fact that the GNSO Council will vote on the JAS
>> report at its next meeting, on June 9. I think this is once again purely
>> factual so I would suggest we add this to the message. In fact, it seems
>> to me that this new bit of information actually helps make the message
>> more factual and less controversial. It helps do away, for example, with
>> considerations of who chartered what and just keeps the message grounded
>> in facts.
>> 
>> So I would like to propose this draft, where we just tell the Board
>> where we're at now and when they can expect something from us.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Stéphane
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dear Peter,
>> 
>> 
>> We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the Board the Joint SO/AC New
>> gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s Second Milestone Report.
>> As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council
>> notes that it has not yet approved the Report. A motion to do this was
>> proposed at our May 19 teleconference and tabled until our next meeting,
>> on June 9.
>> 
>> 
>> I will therefore look to get back to you after this meeting to provide
>> you with an update on the GNSO Council's decision re the JAS report.
>> 
>> I would be grateful if you could convey the GNSO Council's message to
>> the Board.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Stephane van Gelder
>> GNSO Council Chair
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Ching CHIAO
> Vice President, DotAsia Organisation LTD.
> Chair, Asia Pacific Networking Group
> Member of ICANN GNSO Council & RySG
> =====================================
> Email: chiao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx     Skype: chiao_rw
> Mobile: +886-918211372  |  +86-13520187032
> www.registry.asia | www.apngcamp.asia
> www.facebook.com/ching.chiao
>