Re: [ga] GA list clarification

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Denise, 

Many would argue that you are mistaken when you assert that 
"the GNSO has no responsibility to maintain it"

Article X Section 3.1 of the bylaws:

"In addition, the GNSO Council is responsible for managing open forums, in the 
form of mailing lists or otherwise, for the participation of all who are 
willing to contribute to the work of the GNSO; such forums shall be 
appropriately moderated to ensure maximum focus on the business of the GNSO and 
to minimize non-substantive and abusive postings."

Those that utilize the GA list do contribute to the work of the GNSO. Numerous 
examples may be put forth of GA-List contributions (most notably the GA-list 
contribution to the GNSO's new gTLD discussions -- presented at the Washington 
DC GNSO session). 

Just because the Council has chosen to abrogate its responsibility to moderate 
the list does not relieve the GNSO of its responsibility to manage open forums 
for our participation.  Further, just as working groups in an open forum 
environment will elect Chairs and Vice-Chairs to progress discussions in a 
forthright manner (even though there is no provision in the ICANN bylaws for 
those list-members to elect officers), so too should GA-list members be 
empowered in equal measure to elect their own list officers.

I find your comments on the topic of the GA list to be a most disturbing 
position for a policy specialist to put forth.  ICANN has recently affirmed its 
commitment to "facilitate international participation in DNS technical 
coordination".  The non-cooperative approach that you have settled upon is a 
far cry from the notion of "facilitation".

We expect Staff to support any and all reasonable endeavors to contribute to 
the work of the GNSO.  This is an issue of fairness.  

regards,
Danny Younger