[ga] Re: [Gnso-liaison] [ALAC-Internal] [At-Large] Summary for New gTLDsWorkshop at ICANN LA Meeting

[jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Hi Cheryl and all,

  I noticed on the gTLD working group mailing list very few
remarks and comments as well as the issues and considerations
I and Karl posted some time back were not in the archives.
Is there or was there some reason for this?  Please advise.

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 214-244-4827


-----Original Message-----
>From: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <cheryl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Dec 8, 2007 2:10 PM
>To: 'Nguyen Thu Hue ' <huenguyen@xxxxxxxxx>, 
>gnso-liaison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 'alac-internal' 
><alac-internal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [Gnso-liaison] [ALAC-Internal] [At-Large] Summary for New 
>gTLDsWorkshop at        ICANN LA Meeting
>
>Thu Hue,
>
>Your apologise are noted for the meeting, and do travel safely and have a
>successful time in Istanbul.  
>
>I'm sure Sebastian and Erik will be more than happy to take the lead on
>drafting a short piece on the issue, in the manner you describe below, (i.e.
>a synopsis and key messages, synthesis document, with reference to links
>where the original comments and aggregation of comments document can be
>found on your Wiki space), and then work with you, and the WG / list members
>further between now and say December 21... (or please give us an agreed date
>we can look towards).
>
> 
>
>We will note your suggestions below and any that come in from the WG
>Co-Chairs, Sebastian and Erik, between now and the meeting on the 11th, as a
>report from the WG at the meeting. 
>
> 
>
>And as you note that the ALAC endorsed position paper, will be going as an
>advisory to the Board not as a piece for consideration as part of the public
>comment process per se,  I'm sure ALAC can take a short time after it is
>completed to make final points or suggestions then put the document up for
>an online Vote or quick teleconference / online agreement to endorse and
>send in short order once, that is done...
>
>Thank you all for your work so far and the work you are currently doing on
>this topic, and do let us know if to make better use of the new At-Large
>GNSO Liaison shared workspaces:  <https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/>
>https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/ , or have any use of Social text
>in-service training, beyond the great starting and  usage tips now found on
>that 1st page, won't you...
>
>Kindest regards,
>
>CLO
>
> 
>
>From: Nguyen Thu Hue [mailto:huenguyen@xxxxxxxxx] 
>Sent: Saturday, 8 December 2007 8:47 PM
>To: cheryl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; gnso-liaison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>'alac-internal'
>Subject: RE: [ALAC-Internal] [Gnso-liaison] [At-Large] Summary for New
>gTLDsWorkshop at ICANN LA Meeting
>
> 
>
>Dear Cheryl et al, 
>
> 
>
>1.  I have to appologise that i could not join the teleconference meeting on
>11 Dec as i am on travel to Istanbul that day
>
>2.  may i ask Sebastian/Erick to take the lead in this drafting a response
>for ALAC review and state it during the december meeting? i saw a quite
>comprehensive repsonse we made ealier on this issue. However, it was a
>combination of different opinion from individual members. should it be
>better to organise these comments into one ALAC comment to formally
>submitted to the Board or we keep it like it was?
>
>3.  if the working group accepts that we have an ALAC fomal comment on gTLDs
>paper, i would be happy to put all comments we have earlier into one. In
>that case only key message be made without sence of each individual's tone. 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>Thank you, 
>
> 
>
>Thu Hue 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: alac-internal-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:alac-internal-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cheryl
>Langdon-Orr
>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 5:28 AM
>
>To: gnso-liaison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'alac-internal'
>
>Subject: Re: [ALAC-Internal] [Gnso-liaison] [At-Large] Summary for New
>gTLDsWorkshop at ICANN LA Meeting
>
> 
>
>Hello new gTLD Working group...  Thu Hue, Erik, Sebastien, can I ask if the
>
>WG has prepared a short response that the ALAC can review  at its meeting on
>
>the 11th of this month?  
>
>As the 30 Nov public comment deadline has passed, we need to formally put a
>
>statement up as an advisory council, (assuming we do wish to make a
>
>response)  and our best opportunity to discuss a draft of what need only be
>
>a short piece of work building on that previously agreed to in LA, will be
>
>at this December Meeting...  
>
> 
>
>Thu will you please be prepared to speak to this matter on the Agenda, on
>
>the 11th? And if there is a draft statement for us to consider it will need
>
>to go up onto the meeting Wiki page... (if you need help with these Wiki
>
>edits as I did - and still do -  then I'm sure Nick will be happy to give
>
>you a hand...
>
> 
>
>CLO 
>
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: gnso-liaison-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>[mailto:gnso-liaison-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cheryl
>
>Langdon-Orr
>
>Sent: Friday, 23 November 2007 10:43 AM
>
>To: 'Roberto Gaetano'; 'Danny Younger'; 'At-Large Worldwide'
>
>Cc: gnso-liaison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'alac-internal'
>
>Subject: Re: [Gnso-liaison] [At-Large] Summary for New gTLDs Workshop at
>
>ICANN LA Meeting
>
> 
>
>And I assume, as an Advisory Council to the ICANN Board, we also have the
>
>opportunity for any input on this and any other matters that the specifics
>
>that our AC function affords us could be exercised...  Or do I
>
>misunderstand...
>
> 
>
>Regardless a response could and should be created in short order outlining
>
>our affirmation of or concerns with, any aspects of this version, as Roberto
>
>suggests... 
>
> <snipped>
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>ALAC-Internal mailing list
>
>ALAC-Internal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge-lists.
>icann.org
>
> 
>
>ALAC Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>
>ALAC Official: http://alac.icann.org
>
>ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
>