[Gnso-newgtld-dg] Agenda for First Meeting of the DiscussionGroup for New gTLD Subsequent Rounds

Fri Aug 8 15:15:34 UTC 2014

Dear all,

I apologize for initiating an unintended divide.  Perhaps I can push this
discussion in another direction.  How do folks feel about a non-contracted
party Chair?  That would put some distance between some of the things
Stephane has highlighted and perhaps satisfy those who would like to see
‘unconflicted’ as much as possible.  Optically, that might also fit the
bill.

Regarding how many, i.e., 1 Chair with V Chairs or 2 Co-Chairs, etc. if I
understood Brett’s and Matt’s original mail, this group is expected to raise
as many issues as possible and formulate them into some type of cogent
document that will live on past this ‘Discussion Group’ – hence the name.
That is to say, I understand that this is really preliminary work.  If in
fact that is the case, one Chair, with one V Chair (should the Chair be
absent) would probably suffice, in my view.

Kind regards,

RA

Ron Andruff

ONR Consulting, Inc.

From: gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Stephane Van Gelder
Sent: Friday, August 8, 2014 05:26
To: Tobias Sattler
Cc: gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Agenda for First Meeting of the
DiscussionGroup for New gTLD Subsequent Rounds

I am conflicted here (pun intended).

On the one hand, I have never agreed with the self-flagellation that ICANN
imposed on itself (starting with the Board) over conflicts of interest.

To be blunt, there are very few active ICANN community participants who have
no horse in whatever race is being discussed at the time.

What agonizing over conflicts of interests has done IMO, is ensure that the
people with the right amount of knowledge are kept at arm's length and
therefore cannot bring that knowledge to useful community debates.

On the other hand, I think it's very hard in this instance to argue with
Ron's points on optics. A group discussing the second round that selects as
its chair a registry or registrar might pose problems in this regard.

Contradictory I know...

Also, we may choose someone who appears to have no conflict now, and who
turns out to be an applicant in the second round! There's just no way of
knowing that now. The person in question might not even know, because plans
and business opportunities change...

This is why in the past, I've tended to advocate a non anal approach to
COIs. But once again, I see Ron's point...

Best,

Stéphane Van Gelder

Milathan LTD

"Internet Intelligence - Strategic Advice"

----------------
Discover The Milathan Post on http://post.milathan.com

On 8 August 2014 08:57, Tobias Sattler <sattler at united-domains.de
<mailto:sattler at united-domains.de> > wrote:

I tend to agree with Craig and Rubens. From my personal perspective I don’t
think we would find a person that has no horse in the race, because

then this person wouldn’t be part of this DG in the first place. Furthermore
I second the suggestion from Michele and Jeff of holding off on

selection / election. We do have an interim Chair and not hurry.

Tobias

On 07.08.2014, at 20:27, Craig Schwartz <craig at ftld.com
<mailto:craig at ftld.com> > wrote:

Agree with Ruben that being a registry (prospective, incumbent or future
applicant) does not bring conflict.

Good luck finding someone in our very small space that couldn't be accused
of some form of conflict. 

Craig Schwartz
Managing Director
fTLD Registry Services, LLC
600 13th Street, NW
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
Office: +1 202 589 2532
Cell: +1 202 236 1154 <tel:%2B1%20202%20236%201154> 
Skype: craig-schwartz
Twitter: ftld_Registry

Please visit us at www.ftld.com <http://www.ftld.com> 

On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 15:06:49 -0300, Rubens Kuhl<rubensk at nic.br
<mailto:rubensk at nic.br> > wrote:

Ron, 

I disagree. Being a registry (prospective, incumbent or future applicant)
does not bring conflict. Following my suggestion of having 2 leadership
positions (whether is chair/vice-chair, co-chairs etc.), I think it would be
good to have one from each house (contracted parties and non-contracted
parties).

The idea of having no horses in the race would make everybody conflicted, as
even current end-user registrants could be seen as conflicted since some
people argue that the more new gTLDs there are, the less his or her domain
is worth; every stakeholder has an interest in the program, but having an
interest is different from having a conflict of interest. 

Rubens

Em 07/08/2014, à(s) 14:59:000, Ron Andruff<randruff at rnapartners.com
<mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com> > escreveu:

Dear colleagues, 

My thought on the election of leadership is more focused on process, i.e.,
the Chair, V Chairs, or whatever the group decides is best, should be
unconflicted.  That is to say, they should neither be applicants nor new
registries.  Within the long list of members, I am sure that we can select
those that have no horses in the race, as they say.  In this way both the
work and the optics will demonstrate transparency and accountability in an
appropriate manner. 

My two cents

RA 

Ron Andruff 

ONR Consulting, Inc. 

From: gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org>
[mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Eckhaus
Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 11:08
To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight
Cc: gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> 
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Agenda for First Meeting of the Discussion
Group for New gTLD Subsequent Rounds 

I second the suggestion of holding off on selection/election until the group
fills out 

Jeff 

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight<
<mailto:michele at blacknight.com> michele at blacknight.com> wrote: 

Everyone should have an SOI

If they don't have one setting one up is not hard

..

I'd also respectfully suggest that any election / choice of DG leaders be
deferred

I suspect that the group's make up will change between now and September as
people come back from holidays etc and become aware of the group's existence

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation& Domains
 <http://www.blacknight.co/> http://www.blacknight.co/
 <http://blog.blacknight.com/> http://blog.blacknight.com/
 <http://www.technology.ie/> http://www.technology.ie
Intl.  <tel:%2B353%20%280%29%2059%C2%A0%209183072> +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial:  <tel:%2B353%20%280%2959%209183090> +353 (0)59 9183090
Twitter:  <http://twitter.com/mneylon> http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From:  <mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org>
gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org>
gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 12:13 AM
To:  <mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Agenda for First Meeting of the Discussion
Group for New gTLD Subsequent Rounds

be of an introductory nature. The proposed agenda is:

*	Roll Call / Statements of Interest

Suggestion: only reading SoI for people that do not have GNSO SOIs (or have
updates to), to shorten up this part.  

*	Applicability of ICANN principles of transparency and openness

*	Items for initial review -  GNSO Resolution forming this group, GNSO
Working Group Guidelines, GNSO Policy Development Process (to serve as a
reference point for the DG)

*	Discussion of Work Plan – Review of Interim Chair's Draft Work Plan
and discussion of alternatives and tools for completing work

*	Election of DG Leaders – The DG may elect to have co-chairs or
vice-chairs. Once selected, the DG Chair(s) will need to be confirmed by the
GNSO Council.

May I suggest that no attempt to see vice-chairs as representation of that
constituency in the group ? It's so much simpler to have 2 (either
chair/vice-chair, co-chair/co-chair, chair/alternate chair) leaders instead
of a complex structure... since *-chairs only have coordination but no
definition role, it's of no use to see too much into the roles.  

Rubens 

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
 <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg

Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include
privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Rightside Group,
Ltd. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you
are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this
message and then delete it from your system. Thank you. 

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
 <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg

  _____  

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
<http://webmail.encirca.com/hwebmail/services/go.php?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.ic
ann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-newgtld-dg> 

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-dg/attachments/20140808/8bb6aa06/attachment-0001.html>