<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory Committee
- To: "'Joop Teernstra'" <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Peter Dengate Thrush'" <barrister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [ga] Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory Committee
- From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:34:33 -0000
I support the call too!
Debbie Garside
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joop Teernstra
> Sent: 17 February 2008 23:40
> To: Peter Dengate Thrush
> Cc: twomey@xxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; At-Large Worldwide
> Subject: Re: [ga] Proposal: Establishing a Registrant
> Advisory Committee
>
>
> At 08:59 a.m. 18/02/2008, Danny Younger wrote:
>
> >Peter,
> >
> >I write to you prior to the upcoming budget cycle with a proposed
> >solution to enhance ICANN efficiencies.
> >
> >The overarching goal of the ICANN structural and operational review
> >cycle has been to ensure that the ICANN board receive the
> best possible
> >qualitative and timely advice from members of the community
> on vexing
> >issues that require an organizational response.
> >
> >While ICANN has numerous advisory committees and supporting
> >organizations whose responsibilities include putting forth
> the general
> >registrant interest as a part of their duties, the sad
> reality has been
> >that immediate registrant concerns rarely find a dedicated
> >organizational advocate to spearhead policy development activities.
> >
> >What is needed is an Advisory Body whose "sole focus"
> >is upon the needs of the general registrant community whose funds
> >support and drive the ICANN process.
> >
> >Accordingly, I ask you and your peers on the board to consider the
> >establishment of a Registrant Advisory Committee. The registrant
> >community needs a strong advocate in their corner, and ICANN needs a
> >continued focus on general registrant issues.
> >
> >You can make this happen, and ICANN will benefit from such a
> >contribution.
> >
> >best regards,
> >Danny Younger
>
> Peter and Board Members,
>
> FWIW, I support this call.
>
> The "At Large" focus is too diluted and after 10 years it is
> time to give the end-Registrants their due as stakeholders.
>
> Care needs to be taken that this body, if it is ever brought
> into existence, is not captured or sabotaged by the
> registration industry.
>
>
> -joop-
>
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|