RE: [ga] AGP Formal Resolution

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

Chris,
 
thank you for your support. Well, nothing special at the moment. I am
awaiting Eric's response on how we could manage this all together with
our list monitors, e.g. to raise the posting limit for the issues.
 
Then I would like to 'open' a relevant thread. That means, posting an
'issue-oriented' mail on the GA, which is a standard mail with subject
of the specific form I proposed in my previous mail 'RE: [ga] List Rules
- Some Ideas' sent on 1 April.
 
That is all for now. We can be discussing the details of the form of the
'issue-oriented' posts a little if we want but I think the proposed form
could be more or less acceptable. Finally, some contributions will be
coming in for such threads. At least I hope so...
 
Dominik


________________________________

From: chris@xxxxxx [mailto:chris@xxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 7:22 PM
To: Dominik Filipp; Hugh Dierker
Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ga] AGP Formal Resolution


Dominik, just tell me what you want me to do. I'm all for option 3
without the extra chatter.
 
Chris McElroy
 
 

        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: Dominik Filipp <mailto:dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>  
        To: Hugh Dierker <mailto:hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>  
        Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 5:38 AM
        Subject: RE: [ga] AGP Formal Resolution

        Eric and others,
         
        The resolution should gain more support within the GA to achieve
al least a certain degree of credibility.
         
        I've been taking the bull by the horns for a while but this
motion shouldn't be a one man's show but rather a result of a
comprehensible deliberation over the issue discussed here. It all has
started quite encouragingly with number of Chris's, Jeff's and Karl's
valuable contributions, just mentioning a few. But the people here have
apparently started feeling frustrated and the number of relevant posts
has decreased rapidly.
         
        I understand that everyone is already fed up with all that
perpetual ignorance but I see three ways how to proceed further. We can
let things slide, or chatter about everything during coffee breaks, or
go into it. As for me, I am wavering between the first and the third
option. It depends on the overall support gained here on the GA. Maybe
some of us are feeling frustrated or a bit paralyzed but I think the
intellectual potential presented here is a good basis for
self-confidence. It is very likely that we were able to collect more
evidence than all other official bodies have done so far collectively.
In fact, only the registrars/registries were able to issue relevant
arguments worth considering and elaborating on. The rest is mostly just
a masquerade.
        There is also another dimension to consider; an attempt to build
up and test a real bottom-up process to find out whether this is doable
at all. But the decision is, of course, up to everyone.
         
        Ok, stop chattering now. Eric, the formal resolution will
require some sort of minor management as well as some small
modifications to take into effect. It is likely that once the motion
gains more support the daily post limit will be found insufficient. Also
the resulting resolution will likely be seconded and eventually issued
as a pdf document, ok? I personally do not want to discuss too much over
the management details but rather get it running and to correcting it on
the fly.
         
        I can moderate this issue on the GA. The first step could be
opening a thread on the issue. I would start with the five
registrars/registries concerns enumerated in the official domain tasting
report. Several posts sent here already address these concerns more in
detail so those can be further discussed or recollected.
         
        Would it be acceptable?
         
        Dominik
        
        
________________________________

        From: Hugh Dierker [mailto:hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:23 AM
        To: Dominik Filipp; debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [ga] Formal resolution
        
        
        Dominik,
         
        Absolutely. Somehow we should start with taking our header
string and actually narrowing it down further as there are some relevant
yet innapplicable posts there.
        The person - selfulfilling, most interested in the matter should
take the bull by the horns.
        I of course will be here to assist as will many other GA
members. 
        We will be heard if a credible resolution is passed.
         
        Eric
        
        
        

                
                Eric,
                
                What about to prepare the more formal GA resolution
regarding the AGP
                you have proposed?
                We could start collecting relevant points regarding
this.
                
                Dominik
                
                ________________________________
                
                > From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
                Behalf Of Hugh Dierker
                > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:18 PM
                > To: debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                > Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules
                
                > ...
                
                > We are at a point for the first time in months,
                > that the list is coalescing into the form of
                > producing a statement/motion. The AGP issue
                > seems to have come to a head and more formal
                > resolution procedures may be appropriate.
                > I believe it is at a motion stage with 4 seconds.
                > If the desire is to move forward in a constructive
                > effective matter, we should hear that from the
members.
                
                > Eric