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

Thu Aug 7 18:27:00 UTC 2014

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
Skype: craig-schwartz
Twitter: ftld_Registry

Please visit us at www.ftld.com

On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 15:06:49 -0300, Rubens Kuhl 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 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] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Eckhaus
Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 11:08
To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight
Cc: 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 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://blog.blacknight.com/
http://www.technology.ie
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845  

From: gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Rubens 
Kuhl
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 12:13 AM
To: 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
Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
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
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
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/20140807/f7f19407/attachment-0001.html>