[council] JAS WG charter extension motion

[Adrian Kinderis]

Wow.

This is some motion. Interesting that it is slipped in during all the commotion of VI etc.

I am still at a bit of a loss to understand this.

You are now reaching out to Registry Back end Service providers and assuming that ICANN play a role in supporting the payment of their services? Where does this end?

I would love, personally, to have a license for mobile spectrum in Australia. I cannot afford it, therefore I don’t. My bad luck. I am not sure this is too much different. I am not sure why support needs to be granted on any level here.

Originally, I agreed because we were discussing the supporting the development of the application itself. Some folks may have troubles in doing so (especially non English speakers etc). It seems to now be stretching much much further than this.

I have yet to speak to my Stakeholder group on this topic but I assume we wouldn’t be supportive of this motion.

Adrian Kinderis


From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 3:01 AM
To: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry; Gomes, Chuck
Subject: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion


Hello,

I want to submit this motion for JAS WG charter extension in response to ICANN board resolution about supporting applicants and for completion a list of further work items.

Regards

Rafik



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20101111/e63474f7/attachment.html>