[council] Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan

[Alan Greenberg]

Since alternates are not observer, but active members, I did 
interpret it more broadly.  It didn't make much sense if observers 
would be allowed only if the alternate was replacing the council 
member (to check up on them???).

But I will un-invite if so instructed.

At 13/01/2009 05:45 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>Alan,
>
>Note that Glen's message said, "The call will be open to observers and
>alternates if Council members cannot attend."  I would conclude from
>that that an alternate could attend if you are unable to do so yourself.
>But I think that saying 'open to observers and alternates' could easily
>be interpreted more broadly.
>
>Chuck
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org
> > [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 4:56 PM
> > To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> > Subject: Re: [council] Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan
> >
> >
> > Based on Glen's announcement that the meeting was open to
> > observers, I have already issues an invitation. I am
> > expecting Cheryl, Sebastian and perhaps Danny.
> >
> > I take it that you now want me to withdraw that?
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > At 13/01/2009 04:45 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I was asked whether this meeting was open to observers as
> > the previous
> > >meetings had been.  Since we are focusing mainly on issues
> > related to
> > >possible variance between the GNSO Council recommendations and the
> > >implementation plan and on our recent motions, I thought it
> > better that
> > >it be essentially an extended council meeting - but one without
> > >motions.  In that respect I suggest we follow the practice we have
> > >followed with other such extended council meetings, most
> > recently wih
> > >the  Whois study DT, and allow for substitutions but not observers.
> > >The meeting will be recorded and that recording will be available to
> > >all.
> > >
> > >thanks
> > >
> > >a.
> > >
> > >
> > >On 12 Jan 2009, at 11:29, Avri Doria wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>Hi
> > >>
> > >>Based on what I have heard spoken of so far, the following
> > is a draft
> > >>agenda for the New gTLD meeting on 15 January.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>1 - Discuss areas at variance with GNSO policy principles,
> > >>recommendations and guidelines.  Possible areas include, i.a.:
> > >>
> > >>    -  Principle G: Do the review criteria infringe on freedom of
> > >>expression
> > >>    -  Recommendation 1: Are the price levels discriminatory?
> > >>    -  Recommendation 2:  Extent of confusing similarity
> > >>     - Recommendation 5: Reserved names issues
> > >>        - geographic
> > >>         - 2 char IDN
> > >>    - Recommendation 17: what is the clear compliance and sanctions
> > >>process?
> > >>    - IG B: Recommended cost based fees with different applicants
> > >>paying different fees.  Are these fees really cost based? Are some
> > >>applicants subsidizing other applicants?
> > >>    - IG F:  Board resolution process was recommended instead of
> > >>Auction
> > >>    - IG O: Are there any plans for a fee reduction
> > schedule for gTLS
> > >>applicants from economies classified as least developed?
> > >>    - Others?
> > >>
> > >>2 - Discuss the motions we passed vis a vis new gTLDs
> > >>   - introducion of idn tlds
> > >>   - Implementation guideline (IG) E
> > >>
> > >>3 - Discuss the comments received
> > >>
> > >>4 - Discuss follow-up process to this meeting
> > >
> >
> >
> >