[ga] Did .biz/info/org registries respond to public comments before October 10th?

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

In the minutes of the last Board meeting, it was written that:

http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-25sep06.htm

"The Board discussed a "sense of the board" that additional information
was required for the Board to fully consider the agreements, and the
Board specifically expressed a desire to see communications from each
of the registries responding to the public comments that had been
received during the public comment period. The Board agreed that if
they received the responses before October 10th, that they would
discuss the pending agreements again during their next scheduled board
meeting on 18 October 2006."

It is now October 12th, and yet nothing has been posted by the
registries either in the ICANN Correspondences page,
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/ , or on the public comments
mailing lists,
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-28jul06.htm . 

Given that is now 6 days before the next Board meeting, and no agenda
has yet been posted (the Bylaws specify that it is desirable to post an
agenda 7 days before, when practicable), is it right to assume that
they did not submit comments? In my prior post at:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg04840.html

I expressed the view that the public deserves to see their responses if
they submitted them, in keeping with an open and transparent ICANN.

Alternatively, if the registries and ICANN Board plan to heed the call
by the GNSO Council not to make any decision until after the Sao Paulo
meeting:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg02870.html

"To request the Board to delay any decision on the .biz .info and .org
agreements until the ICANN Board meeting after the Sao Paolo ICANN
meetings 2006 and to take into account the current outcome of the
PDPFeb06 task force at that time."

and the registries plan to submit their responses by that meeting, I
trust that the responses will be made available in advance of the Sao
Paolo meetings.

If the registries were smart and have produced new draft contracts for
discussion and public comments to reflect the obvious consensus
opposition to the existing draft contracts, that would be even better.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/