AW: WG: [council] Re: Reminder / Tuesday 14 June 2011 @ 1300 UTC / JAS WG - Board - GAC proposed June 7 meeting
KnobenW at telekom.de
KnobenW at telekom.de
Wed Jun 15 16:17:17 UTC 2011
Bill,
now I understand that my English may have confused you. I was writing about the "GNSO position within this process..." meaning the process of developing the motion. It was my personal opinion and not meaning that Stéphane's comment was the GNSO's position.
Sorry if I mislead you.
Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich
________________________________
Von: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder at indom.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. Juni 2011 17:49
An: William Drake
Cc: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; GNSO Council List; Touray, Katim; Graham, Bill; Rita Johnston Rodin; Bruce Tonkin; "Géry de Saint, Glen"; Carlton SAMUELS A; Rafik Dammak; Crepin-Leblond, Olivier; ICANN (Internal) list ALAC; Karla Valente; gacsec at gac.icann.org
Betreff: Re: WG: [council] Re: Reminder / Tuesday 14 June 2011 @ 1300 UTC / JAS WG - Board - GAC proposed June 7 meeting
Thanks for clarifying Bill.
I think we can agree that we agree ;)
Can I say "please no" to your suggestion for a month-long debate? ;))
Stéphane
Le 15 juin 2011 à 16:49, William Drake a écrit :
Hi Stéphane
Right, I didn't question that it was a personal statement, and indeed I noted that in the first sentence of my reply. I was responding to Wolf-Ulrich's message saying you'd made clear "the GNSO position" and simply underscoring that there's no singular view in the Council. So can we agree that we agree, or shall we have a month long Council debate on the procedures to be followed in determining whether we agree? :-)
Onward and upward,
Bill
On Jun 15, 2011, at 8:21 PM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
Bill,
My message was a personal response and clearly marked in this way.
You are absolutely right that it should in no way be construed as a GNSO position.
But to be honest, I think that was very clearly stated in my message.
Stéphane
Le 15 juin 2011 à 03:14, William Drake a écrit :
Hi
While one can differ with the some of the word choices in the message to which Stéphane has responded in his personal capacity, it should be noted that the sort of optical concerns that were raised are share among at least some in Council who've supported the JAS effort. As such, I would not characterize the situation as there being a singular "GNSO position" on this. There's a majority view and there's a minority view, not full consensus, and I hope we can keep that clear in future references to the matter.
Thanks,
Bill
On Jun 14, 2011, at 6:57 PM, <KnobenW at telekom.de> <KnobenW at telekom.de> wrote:
Stéphane,
I've put Bill Graham as the 3rd GNSO elected board member on cc.
Great message, making the entire process and the GNSO position within this process very clear!
Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich
________________________________
Von: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Stéphane Van Gelder
Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Juni 2011 10:48
An: Katim S. Touray; GNSO Council List; Peter Dengate Thrush; Rita Rodin Johnston; Bruce Tonkin
Cc: ICANN At-Large Staff; Secretary; Jeremy Beale; Glen de Saint Géry; Karla Valente; Carlton Samuels; Rafik Dammak; ALAC EXCOM; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Betreff: [council] Re: Reminder / Tuesday 14 June 2011 @ 1300 UTC / JAS WG - Board - GAC proposed June 7 meeting
Hello Katim,
This is a personal reaction to your message.
I am, frankly, aghast that a Board member would send a message indicating that one of ICANN's SOs has been "slow" in acting on a report, in the way you portray the GNSO as having acted with regards to the JAS Milestone Report.
At best, this shows a lack of understanding of the basic process that our SO is committed to following, by its own bylaws and by the ICANN bylaws. Immediately after the JAS had forwarded its report to us, it was considered by the GNSO Council at its next meeting. During that meeting, one of the GNSO groups requested the motion be deferred for one meeting. We have a long-standing custom of entertaining such requests. Hence the GNSO considered the motion again at its June 9 meeting, where I am happy to say that the motion (requesting, among other things, that the report be put out for public comment asap) was approved unanimously by the Council.
Regardless of your personal interests, I would think that one of your duties as a Board member is to uphold the organisation's bylaws, to respect its SOs and to uphold the processes under which they work.
Implying in your message that the GNSO is attempting to scuttle the "entire process of seeking ways... to provide support to needy new gTLD applicants" is not only untrue (as our unanimous vote shows), it is also a serious disregard of the way ICANN and its SOs work. ICANN's bottom-up process is not "pick and choose". Just because, on this issue that you care strongly about, you feel that things are not moving fast enough, this does not justify false allegations of possible attempts by one SO to "scuttle the process".
As your message was sent in the context of a call with the Board, the GAC, Staff and ALAC, I consider it very public. Hence it could also be construed as an attempt to discredit the hard work being done by the community of volunteers that the GNSO represents.
You request suggestions to the Board "to ensure that progress cannot be hijacked by inaction by any party" (and this is clearly aimed at the GNSO in this case). I would offer one: don't hijack ICANN's core process of working through its SOs and ACs towards the Board! I take your message to be a breach of that process and would personally appreciate reassurance from you that I am mistaken, and that is not what you intend.
In order to initiate possible discussion on this at both Council and Board level, I am copying the GNSO Council, Peter as Chairman of the Board and the two GNSO-elected Board members for their possible comments.
Thanks,
Stéphane
Le 14 juin 2011 à 01:33, Katim S. Touray a écrit :
Dear all,
Thanks so much for your invitation to the call. I certainly was looking forward to joining you on the call, but unfortunately, I have a serious conflict that only came up earlier today (Mon.) I am a consultant helping prepare a strategic action plan for our Fisheries Department in The Gambia, and we were in a workshop all day today discussing a draft plan I presented a few weeks back. We were hoping to go through the entire document today, but we could not. So we agreed to meet again tomorrow to complete our review of the draft document. For this reason, I will not be available to join the call tomorrow, and I am most disappointed by this.
Having said that, I hope you have a successful meeting tomorrow. In addition, I would like to say that I hope your recommendations receive the proper attention they deserve, and that in the end, needy new gTLD applicants get the support they need.
One issue I would like you to discuss on the call is the timeline for the finalization of the JAS WG report. While I agree that it will help to insist that the AG mention that needy applicants should seek support through the process based the JAS WG report, I think it will help to provide a timeline for the finalization of your report.
I'm also troubled by the fact that the GNSO has been rather slow in acting on the JAS WG reports. I fear such a situation might well be construed by many as an effort by the GNSO to scuttle the entire process of seeking ways and means to provide support to needy new gTLD applicants. One important product of such a perception would be that developing countries will feel that ICANN is not sincere when it says (as the Board did in Nairobi last year) that it is interested in launching an inclusive new gTLD program. I need not say that such a perception will also harm ICANN's efforts to strengthen relations with developing countries, and get them on our side on the many issues we'd like to have their support. For this reason, I would like hear what suggestions you have to the board to ensure that progress cannot be hijacked by inaction by any party.
Finally, let me say a big "Thank you!!" again to all of you for your tireless and selfless efforts on this matter. Again, I am very sorry I would not be able to join your call, and best wishes in your deliberations.
Have a great week, and safe travels to Singapore!
Sincerely,
Katim
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 4:35 PM, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
The JAS Working Group Call with members of the Board, GAC and GNSO invited, is scheduled on Tuesday, 14 June 2001, at 13:00 UTC. We hope you will be able to join us.
PROPOSED AGENDA:
* Introduction (5 to 10 minutes) Evan Leibovitch - Highlights Second Milestone Report covering short history how it was developed and specific summary points
* Board/GAC questions/comments (30 to 40 minutes) - JAS WG would like to listen to individual feedback and receive questions/suggestions from GAC and Board members
* Singapore (5 to 10 minutes) Rafik Dammak/Carlton Samuels - Should there be a public meeting with the JAS WG GAC/Board members during the Singapore ICANN Meeting?
As a reminder, it would help the JAS WG to better prepare if you could:
1. Advise on the representatives from the Board and GAC that will be able to attend the teleconference.
2. Send us any questions or comments on the Milestone Report in advance, if possible.
Kind regards,
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
ALAC Chair
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dial-in details: Tuesday 14 June 2011 at 13:00 UTC
For other places see:
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=JAS+WG&iso=20110607T13 <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=JAS+WG&iso=20110607T13>
ADOBE CONNECT:
http://icann.adobeconnect.com/jas/ <http://icann.adobeconnect.com/jas/>
Wiki Workspace:
https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/SO-AC+New+gTLD+Applicant+Support+Working+Group+%28JAS-WG%29 <https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/SO-AC+New+gTLD+Applicant+Support+Working+Group+%28JAS-WG%29>
If you require a dial-out, please email staff at atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff at atlarge.icann.org> with you preferred contact number.
____________________________________________________________________________
Participant passcode: JAS
For security reasons, the passcode will be required to join the call.
____________________________________________________________________________
Dial in numbers:
Country Toll Numbers Freephone/Toll Free Number
ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519
AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260
AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260
AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260
AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260
AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260
AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260
AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259
BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795
BRAZIL 0800-7610651
CHILE 1230-020-2863
CHINA* 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670
10800-120-1670
COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474
CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177
DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324
ESTONIA 800-011-1093
FINLAND Land Line: 106-33-203 0-800-9-14610
FINLAND Mobile: 09-106-33-203 0-800-9-14610
FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496
FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496
FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496
GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247
GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312
HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856
HUNGARY 06-800-12755
INDIA 000-800-852-1268
INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982
IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368
ISRAEL 1-80-9216162
ITALY 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383
JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4799 0066-33-132439
JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5191 0066-33-132439
LATVIA 8000-3185
LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364
MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065
MEXICO 001-866-376-9696
NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378
NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722
NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157
PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065
PERU 0800-53713
PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716
POLAND 00-800-1212572
PORTUGAL 8008-14052
RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011
SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663
SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25
SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414
SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352
SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053
SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622
SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032
TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797
THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056
UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029
UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029
UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029
UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029
UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029
URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421
USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726
VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702
*Access to your conference call will be either of the numbers listed, dependent on the participants' local telecom provider.
Restrictions may exist when accessing freephone/toll free numbers using a mobile telephone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20110615/646cce81/attachment.html>
More information about the council
mailing list