[registrars] [Fwd: Groups - boardrm - New ballot "Amendment to Motion on GNSO task force on contract issues for existing gTLD registries."]

[Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> The text of this ballot is as follows:
> ---
> "Amendment to Motion on GNSO task force on contract issues for existing gTLD registries."
> I suggest to alter 2b. While this may be appropriate for gTLDs,
> it is not for sTLDs. sTLDs operate in a defined environment with
> special needs, the GNSO has only limited insight. The delegation of
> "certain" policy making decisions is appropriate  - and necessary
> unless you want the sTLD to stall -  provided the policy
> range is well-defined. The problem is to find a definition of the term
> "certain".


Speaking in my personal capacity, I urge the members of the constituency 
to defeat this amendment on the basis that it puts too much control in 
the hands of the sponsor and registry operator at the expense of 
registrars. The registrar voice in the policy process will continue to 
be diminished if we do not keep proper policy making responsibilities 
within ICANN's GNSO.
By moving more policy making responsibilities to the registries, we will 
continue to see private negotiations between ICANN staff and the 
registries set the policy that we are forced to work with.
-r

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Groups - boardrm - New ballot "Amendment to Motion on GNSO task 
force on contract issues for existing gTLD registries."
Date: 27 Apr 2006 07:31:03 -0700
From: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx

ICANN Registrars Constituency member,

A new ballot has been presented to ICANN Registrars Constituency.  To 
vote on this ballot, go here:
http://www.boardrooms.org/apps/org/workgroup/registrars/ballot.php?id=135

Please DO NOT REPLY to this email; instead, vote using the above link.

The text of this ballot is as follows:
---
"Amendment to Motion on GNSO task force on contract issues for existing 
gTLD registries."
I suggest to alter 2b. While this may be appropriate for gTLDs,
it is not for sTLDs. sTLDs operate in a defined environment with
special needs, the GNSO has only limited insight. The delegation of
"certain" policy making decisions is appropriate  - and necessary
unless you want the sTLD to stall -  provided the policy
range is well-defined. The problem is to find a definition of the term
"certain".

- Yes
- No
- Abstain
- Other

---

The ballot closes Thursday, 4 May 2006 @ 12:00 pm PT.  Please vote 
before then by visiting:
http://www.boardrooms.org/apps/org/workgroup/registrars/ballot.php?id=135

Thank you,
Boardrooms Administration

Regards,

--

                       -rr








                "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
                                           All life is an experiment.
                            The more experiments you make the better."
                        - Ralph Waldo Emerson


Contact Info:

Ross Rader
Director, Research & Innovation
Tucows Inc.
t. 416.538.5492
c. 416.828.8783

Get Started: http://start.tucows.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org