Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz contract

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Danny,
1. The proper channel to ask ICANN questions about its activities, is through the Chair of the Board, or the President. That would be okay, if it ever actually produced a response.

2. Asking individual directors for their "guidance" is not the right way to deal with an organization. At least not with ICANN, because individual directors have no interest in understanding what users have to say. If I want to deal with the US government I email or phone my congressman. I don't call the President of the US. So your idea of organization seems to conflict with others.

3. Your desire to look for guidance from individual directors is understandabel, as the history of ICANN is full with strong individuals, who may have been giving guidance to you before. The problem is that none of the board members are giving guidance. Nor do they listen to anyone under the size or importance of IBM, AT&T, Microsoft, Google, or Verisign. Individual users are getting pisswed off because ICANN is catering to corporate and intellectual property interests over the needs of individual users and small business owners. Bottom-up consensus to you guys means talking to the VP of Verisign once in awhile instead of the President.

4. It's better for the broader Internet community to have a strong ICANN, than just strong individuals with desire to give guidance when asked. How can you have any idea what is in the best interest of the Internet community when you do not listen to them?

5. As for your questions, see the minutes of our January meeting. And note - I do not make comments, or give the "guidance" you requested. Neither you should expect me to comment on this - if you need the comments, read point # 1 above. Rule Number 1: The Board is always right. Rule Number 2. If the board is ever wrong, see rule number 1.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Veni Markovski 
  To: Danny Younger ; Veni Markovski ; Neuman, Jeff ; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 5:06 AM
  Subject: Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz contract


  Danny,
  1. The proper channel to ask ICANN questions about its activities, is through the Chair of the Board, or the President. 

  2. Asking individual directors for their "guidance" is not the right way to deal with an organization. 

  3. Your desire to look for guidance from individual directors is understandabel, as the history of ICANN is full with strong individuals, who may have been giving guidance to you before. 

  4. It's better for the broader Internet community to have a strong ICANN, than just strong individuals with desire to give guidance when asked. 

  5. As for your questions, see the minutes of our January meeting. And note - I do not make comments, or give the "guidance" you requested. Neither you should expect me to comment on this - if you need the comments, read point # 1 above. 

  attached quote: 

  http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-10jan06.htm


  Extensions of Deadlines for gTLD Agreement Renewal Processes 

  ICANN Staff presented a proposal to allow the current group of gTLD registries that would be requiring renegotiation of their agreements to have the renewal proposals extended to allow for the current ongoing gTLD registry negotiations to continue in good faith. After a discussion of the pending contractual negotiations ICANN was having with Afilias, Public Interest Registry, Neustar and VeriSign the board discussed the impact of such discussion. Hagen Hultszch moved and Veni Markovski seconded the following proposed resolution: 

  Whereas, ICANN has been engaged in discussions with gTLD registry operators regarding renewal terms consistent with their existing registry contracts. 

  Whereas, these negotiations are intended to result in revised new registry agreements for those TLDs, including extended expiration dates and other revised terms to come into line with ICANN's other recent registry agreements. 

  Whereas, the existing agreements provide that each operator may submit a renewal proposal no later than eighteen months prior to the expiration date, and that ICANN would then have six months to review and discuss the renewal proposal. 

  Whereas, it may be beneficial for all parties involved to allow for extensions of the deadline for submitting a renewal proposal so that the registry operators will not have to expend resources on developing comprehensive renewal proposals while discussions with ICANN on replacement registry agreements are continuing. 

  Resolved (06.02), the President and the General Counsel are authorized to continue negotiations with any such registry operator (s) in accordance with existing contractual terms, and are authorized to extend the relevant renewal process deadlines as necessary and appropriate for up to six full months, while discussions continue. 

  The Motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote V 15-0. 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.5/406 - Release Date: 8/2/06