Re: [ga] RE: GA irrelevant

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sotiris and all,

  If I recall correctly Roberto already long ago answered the
question you pose.  I believe the answer was no essentially, but
if I am mistaken I am sure Roberto will correct me accordingly.

  If the GA wishes to morph itself into a registrants constituency
of some sort, a voting mechnisim developed by GA members themselves
and at GA members expense will likely be necessary and advisable.
Perhaps considering purchasing Joops 'Voting booth' or a unrestricted
license to use it would be a preferrable option.  There is also
many other such online voting applications some with multilingual
capability such as see: 
http://www.bigpulse.com/elections?gclid=CKaVzNz7z6ECFQ1X2godNnE_Lw
Approval of the GNSO/ICANN will of such a voting mechnisim of course 
will be the GNSO's/ICANN's decision and perogative if indeed the 
GA is to become a ICANN constituency of whatever sort.  But quite 
frankly and from my own knowledge and perspective there are already 
several quasi-registrants constituencies outside of the GNSO/ICANN, 
some of which have had links to posted on this forum and a number 
of other fora.

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders and growing, 
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
Phone: 214-244-4827



-----Original Message-----
>From: sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Sent: May 13, 2010 1:42 PM
>To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [ga] RE: GA  irrelevant
>
>
>Yes, Roberto, please answer Andy's question and then please revisit my
>question on SPECIFICS: How must registrants organize themselves in a
>manner that will be acceptable to ICANN? Will ICANN fund a voting
>mechanism, for instance?
>
>Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
>Andy Gardner wrote:
>> I trust ICANN will be funding this from the per-domain tax already paid by
>> Registrants?
>>
>> On May 12, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Sotiris:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, why don't you tell us, finally, how we should go about
>>>> organizing ourselves in a manner that would be acceptable.
>>>> Please be as specific as possible.
>>>
>>> I thought I already did.
>>> Since the changes to the GNSO structure, proposed by the GNSO Review WG
>>> and
>>> the SIC, have been approved by the Board, there is the concrete
>>> possibility
>>> of creating a constituency for registrants. Creation of new
>>> constituencies
>>> has even been encouraged last year.
>>> This is a new opportunity, something that did not exist in the past.
>>> It is now up to the registrants on this list or anywhere else to decide
>>> whether they want to take advantage of this opportunity or not.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Roberto
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>