RE: [ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory Committee

["Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>]

Jeff,

yes, I also see the GA a good place for deliberations on registrant
constituency and other issues as well.
But there are two different things here you have to distinguish between.
Registrant constituency and/or advisory committee are official bodies
that have to be first identified and established within the ICANN
structures with all the power delegated, and as such have nothing to do
either with the GA or any other mailing list. The efforts here are not
about promoting the GA to be automatically incorporated into the
structure as is. The mentioned bodies have specific attributes and are
driven by respective bylaws totally different from those applied on
mailing lists. I just want to say that there is a big difference between
official bodies and mailing lists and that a mailing list cannot be
simply switched to an ICANN body.

Another thing is that once such a constituency and/or committee will be
officially established and formed, people from the GA or other mailing
list or from anywhere else may be elected as official members, or act as
volunteers, participants, and so forth.

Dominik
 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jeffrey A. Williams
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 4:35 PM
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Peter Dengate Thrush; twomey@xxxxxxxxx; At-Large Worldwide
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory
Committee


Dominik and all,

  Agree here as well.  As is well known, our members have been
advocating for a Independent registrants constituency for several years.
In fact, we like to consider our organization as such.  We are not
however part of the ICANN constituency structure.  But I personally
fairly sure either our organization could be incorporated into the ICANN
Constituency structure/GNSO or would give serious consideration to the
formation of such as long as the rules for membership are not overly
restrictive.  Of course that is where the rubber meets the road so to
speak...

  Further the GA is a good place to for the time being, discuss and
determine the details of such a Independent Registrants Constituency.

Dominik Filipp wrote:

> Chuck,
>
> agreed on all counts here. The Registrant Constituency is definitely 
> the goal worth pursuing.
> As regards the details, we could start discussing this here on the GA 
> and gain some support/knowledge from other people.
>
> Dominik
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 11:26 PM
> To: Dominik Filipp; Peter Dengate Thrush; Danny Younger
> Cc: twomey@xxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; At-Large Worldwide
> Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory 
> Committee
>
> I have always felt that registrant representation would be good but I 
> have yet to see anyone come up with an effective way to make it happen

> that results in broad representation of the registrant community.  I 
> know I don't have to tell people on this list that the registrant 
> population is hugely diverse and comes from all parts of the world.
>
> As we get closer to GNSO improvements that will likely give increased 
> representation to individuals via the non-commercial stakeholder 
> group, this would be an excellent time for people to develop and 
> propose a workable way to create a registrant constituency that truly 
> does represent a broad base of non-commercial, individual gTLD 
> registrants around world.
>
> Chuck Gomes
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Dominik Filipp
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 10:33 AM
> To: Peter Dengate Thrush; Danny Younger
> Cc: twomey@xxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; At-Large Worldwide
> Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory 
> Committee
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Peter Dengate Thrush
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 7:46 AM
> To: Danny Younger
> Cc: twomey@xxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; At-Large Worldwide
> Subject: [ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory 
> Committee
>
> . . .
>
> >> 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.
> >>
>
> > This may be a useful development.
> > I should need to see it carefully distinguished, with advantages and

> > disadvantages laid out and contested between the current user groups

> > (Business and Non Commercial constituencies of GNSO), and the At 
> > Large
>
> > I appreciate that registrants are not, as a group, necessarily a 
> > subset of "user", or of At Large, as it includes the domaineers who 
> > are registrants for trading and profit - is it their interests in 
> > particular that you feel are not being served by the current 
> > structure?
>
> In fact, we need more than just a Registrant Advisory Committee. We 
> need a fully-fledged Registrant Constituency with all the voting
power. Why?
> For simple and logical reason. The Registrants stay on top of the 
> financial chain generating income for ICANN. Without the need for 
> domain names there would be no need for either Registries or 
> Registrars or ISPs. Thus Registrants, though indirectly, is the very 
> first gear wheel in the income machinery.
> The Registrant Constituency should have been the very first 
> constituency established within the ICANN structures when ICANN was 
> formed. And the most influential as it indeed deserves. Without such 
> representation ICANN can barely hold its claim as being an advocate of

> all internet users or stakeholders.
>
> . . .
>
> Regards
>
> Dominik Filipp
>
> > You can make this happen, and ICANN will benefit from such a 
> > contribution.
> >
> > best regards,
> > Danny Younger
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > __
> > ______________
> > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/ 
> > newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>
> Peter Dengate Thrush
> barrister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Regards,

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 My Phone: 214-244-4827