ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

RE: [registrars] RE: ICANN India


My two cents, for what it's worth (about a cent and a half probably J):
recordings of long meetings (ours are held over a full day let’s not forget)
are a good idea in theory but end up being very hard to use in reality
because of the sheer bulk of audio to sift through.

 

It would however be great to find some way of being able to distribute the
contents of our meetings to those members of the constituency that aren’t
able to attend. But I don’t quite know what the most efficient way of doing
that is…

 

 

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager

 

INDOM – Noms de domaine / Domain names
124-126, rue de Provence
75008 Paris. France
0820 77 7000
(Prix d'un appel local) 
De l'étranger (calling from outside France): + 33 1 76 70 05 67
 <http://www.indom.com/> www.indom.com

 

Daily domain name industry news:  <http://www.domaines.info/>
www.domaines.info

Mon blog/My blog :  <http://www.domaines.info/> www.stephanevangelder.com

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nevett, Jonathon
Sent: vendredi 29 février 2008 17:48
To: Paul Goldstone
Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [registrars] RE: ICANN India

 

 

Paul:

 

We definitely permit telephonic participation at RC meetings.  We

usually have a handful of folks on the phone during the meetings.  I

understand that the technology, unfortunately, is not always up to

snuff, but ICANN tells me that they are trying to rectify any such

shortfalls.  As for other non-RC meetings that occur as part of the

broader ICANN meeting, I'd refer you to the ICANN public participation

site http://public.icann.org/ and/or the ICANN public participation

manager, kieren.mccarthy@xxxxxxxxx.  I believe that there are ways to

participate real time, but I'm not sure if you can do so telephonically.

 

Finally, with regard to recording meetings, we definitely have had some

push back in the past about doing this from a number of folks.  Is there

significant interest in recording meetings?  The GNSO records its

meetings, but I don't believe that any of the other constituencies do

so. 

 

Thanks.

 

Jon

-----Original Message-----

From: Paul Goldstone [mailto:paulg@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 

Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:49 AM

To: Nevett, Jonathon

Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: Fwd: ICANN India

 

Jon,

 

If you're the right person to ask, would you mind clarifying the 

following for myself and the group, in anticipation for future meetings:

 

1) Is it acceptable for people on the phone to also participate in RC 

meetings, or are they only permitted to listen?

 

2) Is it possible for people to attend other ICANN meetings by phone 

or only the RC meeting?

 

3) Is it possible/acceptable to record the RC meetings and make them 

available for download (by members only) via the new website eventually?

 

Thanks,

 

~Paul

:DomainIt

 

 

>Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:52:48 -0500

>To: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

>From: Paul Goldstone <paulg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

>Subject: ICANN India

> 

>All,

> 

>I just wanted to express my gratitude again to everyone who made it 

>out to the ICANN conference in India.  It was a late night/morning 

>here in EST but I was pleased to have the opportunity to attend the RC 

>meeting by phone.

> 

>There were times I would have liked to express my opinions but the 

>phone connection wasn't great.  I know there was at least one time 

>that Tim from GoDaddy tried to make comments too.  For future 

>meetings, assuming the phone connection is clear, is it acceptable for 

>people on the phone to also participate, or are they only permitted to

listen?

> 

>Furthermore, is it possible for people to attend other ICANN meetings

by 

>phone or is that only for the RC meeting?

> 

>In regards to the RC meeting itself, there was a lot of healthy 

>discussion and great points were made.  I was somewhat disappointed to 

>not hear more comments on the option for providing additional 

>allowance at times when the suggested threshold was exceeded due to 

>testing or fraud.  I think it may have been mentioned but I would have 

>liked more weight to be given that point.  It could have also been 

>clarified that Nominet currently has this very discretionary method in

place.

> 

>I also felt that several people made great points against locking 

>domains for 60 days following a whois update.  Elliot in particular 

>made some incredibly strong arguments and I agree with his statements. 

> I couldn't tell who, but either Kurt or Paul stated that it is under 

>review whether those actions are against policies, and that they'd get 

>back to us within a week.  I'm eager to hear their final decision.

> 

>As an aside, I don't know if this is acceptable or not, but I wonder 

>if it'd be possible to record the RC meetings and make them available 

>for download (by members only) via the website eventually.

> 

>Best Regards,

> 

>~Paul

>:DomainIt

 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



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