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

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

Jeff,

once the registrant constituency and/or the registrant advisory
committee come into being the similar problems will disappear.
The GA can still remain a good place for deliberations and the source of
public input out of which decisions will be formed. But just one of the
sources, I guess. We should also have a more quantifiable input such as
surveys, straw polls, etc.

Dominik


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jeffrey A. Williams
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 2:23 AM
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: At-Large Worldwide
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory
Committee


Dominik and all,

  I understand fully the problem, that being the GA is not an official
body within the ICANN structure.  That needs to change!
Some may believe that the ALAC is a replacement for the GA.
I don't see it that way, I see the GA as the only place were at present,
the Independant Registrants AND users have a voice, all be it no vote.

Dominik Filipp wrote:

> 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

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