Re: [atlarge-discuss] WG-OUTREACH 003 - Update and Action List

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Danny, Hans and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Dear Hans,
>
> You have asked the following questions:
>
> 1.  Can you suggest 2-3 issues that are especially important to address?

  Of course.  But I don't see how 2-3 issues is related to the subject line
of this WG-OUTREACH???

  Here is the short list:
1.) Completing the Bylaws, Charter, and Articles of incorporation drafts
     for the members to review, offer amendments, and suggestions to,
     and than vote upon as to a final product of these very important and
     basic organizational documents.

2.) Initial funding, along with a funding model and finance committee (to be
elected)
     BTW #1 and 2 here could be combined in a single E-Mail ballot.

3.) A formal voting process with software.

4.) Our own mailing list software installed, set up and operational for
     our organizations current DN. This decision should be made by our
     current and new Webmaster as to which server based list software
     that is affordable (Essentially free) that he can handle.

5.) Working on a position paper/policy from this organization on the
      following:
      a.) Transfer and delete practice and policy for DN's.
      b.) Whois standardization policy and/or best practice
      c.) Assignment of new TLD's and registration policies for them.
      d.) Privacy and security concerns for stakeholders/users for ecommerce
            and general use of the internet.

>
> 2.  Can you help me and others to develop substantive inputs?

  Hans already has or should have much of this information already.
It is in the archives of this ML forum.

>
> 3.  How can we have an impact in Shanghai?

  I think at this juncture impact in Shanghai is going to be minimum
at best from this organization unless or until we have the basic house
keeping chores done and some votes taken on issues, such as the ones
above that I listed so that they can be legitimately presented in Shanghai
in this organizations name and on the behalf of the members.

>
>
> Please consider the following response:
>
> 1.  There has been sufficient concern expressed regarding the predictability
> of the policy development process.  Such concerns have been addressed by the
> development of procedures that are soon to be incorporated into the proposed
> ICANN Bylaws.  These procedures establish a clear timetable to resolve policy
> issues that have been formally raised within a Supporting Organization.  In
> my view, it would be prudent for the At-Large to work to some degree in
> parallel with the SOs so that the ICANN Board may have the benefit of
> well-considered advice from both the constituencies and the At-Large at the
> same time for evaluation.

  I personally agree with this Danny, but as you know a number of
members have expressed extreme concern in working with ICANN
in any direct way presently. Hence I think a formal non-member
presentation to this organization regarding this from you would
seem appropriate so as the members can consider it and vote
upon it's appropriate value to this organization.

>  Accordingly, it would be appropriate for the
> At-Large to provide commentary on the two issues now at the stage of being
> deemed "Interim Reports":  transfers and WHOIS.  It would also be appropriate
> to offer preliminary input on the recently launched policy initiative
> regarding deletes.

  I would agree here with you as well Danny.  But again a number of other
members are not prepared or do not wish to deal with these issues in this
manner directly with ICANN.  Hence as I have also suggested such
submittals of proposals to these "Interim Reports" of the questionably
legitimate Task Forces of ICANN's on these matters/issues might best
be presented directly to the USG/DOC/NTIA via Nancy Victory
or Cathy Handley.  This was if you recall also suggested by
Nancy J. Victory some two months ago as well...

>
>
> 2.  The development of substantive inputs requires a proper working
> environment.  Just as every Task Force, Working Group, or Committee has its
> own dedicated list within which it can operate, so too is this organization
> advised to provide such dedicated discussion lists to its members for
> concentrated focused work.  In an earlier message to the Panel,
> http://www.fitug.de/atlarge-panel/0209/msg00084.html , you offered to host
> some lists for this group on the CPSR server  and noted that you inquired in
> CPSR and discussed it with Joanna, and so far the idea has been accepted
> (with the caveat that "I don't think we can create the list until we know the
> name of our organization").  Now that the name issue has been resolved, one
> would expect that the services previously offered could now be made
> operational.  Your feedback on this point would be appreciated.

  I strongly agree that we now need to get these lists with the necessary list
software installed without delay as Majordomo is free and therefore
requires no financial incumbency upon the members or this organization
at this time.

>
>
> 3.  Achieving an impact in Shanghai requires putting the ICANN Board on
> notice that the At-Large community will be providing supplemental quarterly
> status reports to the U.S. Department of Commerce detailing how ICANN is
> addressing the task of soliciting informed participation by the broader user
> community, as well as detailing how it actually implements processes and
> mechanisms to ensure responsiveness to inquiries regarding DNS management
> issues tendered by individual Internet stakeholders.

  This is an excellent idea.  It is however not new as you well know and in
progress by a number of other stakeholder/user related organizations as well
as commercial based organizations.

> ICANN only respects
> those that command sufficient power to affect their operations.  By
> indicating our resolve to keep the spotlight constantly on ICANN's activities
> we will gain the power that comes with the ability to pose a threat.  The
> At-Large has been a thorn in ICANN's side for many years -- it is now time to
> turn that thorn into a bayonet.

  Also a good point here as well.  But this required that we have the
will and the ability to do as you rightly IMHO suggest.  That means we
must get our house in order FIRST.  We have yet to achieve doing so.
But we have made some begrudging progress in this direction.   Such
an action as you suggest here Danny requires real funding, which we
seem to have a problem by some of our members is actually achieving.
I personally find this to be particularly debilitating to the organization
as well as an indicator as to the disfunctionality to a degree, of
this organizations fledgling efforts to get off the ground.

>
>
>

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de