ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [ga] GA list and the GNSO council

  • To: "'Danny Younger'" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Gomes, Chuck'" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'ga'" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ga] GA list and the GNSO council
  • From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:39:59 +0200
  • In-reply-to: <720665.76076.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcfC9uE9g8K/M8eiSniZl1AG+Po1MAAHEtQw

Danny,

I see that another habit that we have lost is to read the messages before
replying.

My referring to the "polite no" was related to Avri's reply to Jeff's
question that was not at all about intake, which if I remember correctly was
an issue raised by yourself, but about allowing the whole world to post to
the Name Council mailing list.

Those are two separate issues, and should not be confused. While the intake
mechanism has some merit, I don't think that to give full access to
everybody to the Name Council list can be a practical solution.

Regards,
Roberto



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
> Sent: 10 July 2007 14:56
> To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Gomes, Chuck'; jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'ga'
> Subject: RE: [ga] GA list and the GNSO council
> 
> ... and perhaps we have also lost respect for those not 
> currently represented in the GNSO Council that by rights 
> should have access to an intake procedure?
> 
> When the RegisterFly mess was unfolding I never once heard a 
> GNSO Council discussion on policy recommendations to address 
> the problems raised by registrants caught up in this 
> disaster.  At least an intake mechanism as requested by Jeff 
> could point to the need to timely address serious concerns 
> that otherwise might not make it onto the Council's agenda.
> 
> It's too bad that you can't recognize the value of Jeff's 
> contribution... It's certainly a reasonable request, and it 
> does reflect a process previously agreed to by consensus 
> within the DNSO at the Council level.
> 
> --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > It was indeed a polite no.
> > Maybe we have lost the habit of politeness?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Roberto
> 
> 
> 
>        
> ______________________________________________________________
> ______________________
> Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever 
> you're surfing.
> http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>