[council] Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan

[Alan Greenberg]

Thanks. I will remind my folks that observers observe.  Alan

At 13/01/2009 06:46 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>If the invitation already went out inviting observers, it would seem 
>rude to rescind it at this point.  Although I was hoping to keep the 
>meeting somewhat focused.
>
>if no one objects, I will go back on my previous suggestion and 
>accept that it is too late for that suggestion.  I.e. the invitation 
>as Glen has sent it stands and observers are invited.
>
>
>a.
>
>
>On 13 Jan 2009, at 16:56, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
>>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
>>
>>