[NA-Discuss] FW: Second Vote on the RAA Package now open

Danny Younger dannyyounger at yahoo.com
Mon Dec 29 13:41:06 EST 2008 

Just for the sake of complete disclosure, who put these motions on the table?  Might it be Tim Ruiz of the registrar's constituency?


--- On Mon, 12/29/08, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: Second Vote on the RAA Package now open
> To: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 1:20 PM
> The two GNSO motions currently on the table are:
> 
> 1.
> 
> Whereas:
>     - ICANN has undertaken a lengthy consultative process
> related to
>     amending the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA);
>     - The parties have arrived at a set of amendments that
> are generally
>     thought to be worthy of inclusion in the RAA;
> 
> Resolve:
>     The GNSO Council supports the attached RAA amendments
> and recommends to
>     the Board that they be adopted.
> 
> 2.
> 
> Whereas:
>     - The GNSO Council has recommended that the RAA
> amendments developed by
>     the ICANN community be adopted;
>     - There is a belief that additional amendments to the
> RAA may be
>     required;
>     - The Registrar Constituency is open to continuing the
> dialogue about
>     future changes to the RAA;
> 
> Resolve:
>     The GNSO Council calls on ICANN to establish a
> consultative process by
>     which to review the superset of community-suggested RAA
> issues and
>     amendments not addressed in the present set of
> amendments and to work
>     with Registrars to develop a procedure for proposing
> additional
>     amendments in the future.
> 
> I note that for future changes that are within GNSO scope
> and for which we can build community support, we do have the
> Issues Report path which can be moderately fast (as the
> ICANN procedures go), which gives us a level of input into
> the timeline.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 29/12/2008 12:36 PM, Brendler, Beau wrote:
> > The first vote had three options:
> > Delay until a briefing could take place
> > Vote to approve the package while acknowledging there
> could be further amendments
> > Vote no
> > 
> > The second vote removes the "delay until a
> briefing could take place" option.
> > 
> > I didn't think it appropriate to vote yes the
> first time, without a more thorough briefing to the ALAC
> about where things stood after the ALAC made a statement
> about the RAA back in September.
> > 
> > I still remain concerned that the language about
> future amendments is too vague and lacks a timetable.
> > 
> > BB
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > From: eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com
> [mailto:eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Eduardo
> Diaz, PE
> > Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 12:27 PM
> > To: Brendler, Beau
> > Cc: NA Discuss
> > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: Second Vote on the RAA
> Package now open
> > 
> > Beau:
> > 
> > I am not too familiar with the RAA details but what
> was in the first RAA submission that make you vote
> "no"?
> > 
> > Eduardo Diaz
> > ISOC-PR
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Brendler, Beau
> <Brenbe at consumer.org<mailto:Brenbe at consumer.org>>
> wrote:
> > Dear NA region:
> > 
> > I voted no on the last RAA submission.
> > 
> > There's been a modification, as you see below.
> > 
> > How would you like me to vote on this modification?
> > 
> > I am inclined to vote "yes," as long as we
> can count on the "with the possibility of further
> policy development in the future" part. Otherwise, from
> what I am able to understand, we might lose the good work
> that's been done on the RAA up to this point.
> > 
> > Beau Brendler
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> alac-announce-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:alac-announce-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> [mailto:alac-announce-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:alac-announce-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>]
> On Behalf Of At-Large Staff
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 1:29 AM
> > To:
> alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> > Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Second Vote on the RAA
> Package now open
> > 
> > Dear ALAC members,
> > 
> > A briefing was recently held on the RAA Package by Tim
> Cole and Kurt Pritz from ICANN staff. You can find the audio
> recording and summary minutes of this briefing under:
> >
> https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?discussion_on_the_raa
> > 
> > Following this briefing, it was decided to start a
> second online vote on the ALAC recommendation to the GNSO on
> the RAA Package. The new vote will be open until 08 January
> 2009 at 1200 UTC, which will allow the ALAC GNSO Liaison to
> announce the result at the GSNO Council meeting scheduled
> later that day.
> > 
> > You will be asked to choose among the following
> options:
> > 
> > 1. Recommend the GNSO to accept the current RAA
> package, with the possibility of further policy development
> in the future.
> > 2. Recommend that the GNSO do not approve the current
> RAA package.
> > 3. Abstain
> > 
> > You will receive a separate email with you voting
> credentials shortly.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Marie-Hélène
> Bouchoms, Heidi Ullrich ICANN At-Large Staff
> > email:
> staff at atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff at atlarge.icann.org>
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC-Announce mailing list
> >
> ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> >
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > 
> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> > 
> > ***
> > Scanned
> > 
> > **
> > This e-mail message is intended only for the
> designated recipient(s) named above. The information
> contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be
> confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy,
> redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any
> purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents.  If
> you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
> notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete
> this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.
> > 
> > ------
> > NA-Discuss mailing list
> >
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> >
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > 
> > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > ------
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > -ed
> > 
> > ***
> > Scanned
> > 
> > **
> > This e-mail message is intended only for the
> designated recipient(s) named above. The information
> contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be
> confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy,
> redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any
> purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents.  If
> you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
> notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete
> this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.
> > ------
> > NA-Discuss mailing list
> > NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > 
> > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > ------
> 
> 
> 
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> 
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list