Re: [At-Large] {Disarmed} Re: Public Forum presentation

On 29/03/07, jam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <jam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:

Yes, it would be good for her to give us a very simple roadmap - first you step here, hten here... follow the yellow footprints!
JAM
Quoting Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> We also have Maria Farrell scheduled to join the meeting today and she has
> been prepped that there are many questions about the procedure, and I've
> also asked if she can comment on what the expected content of the request
> would be, and of course answer questions or discuss other subjects related
> to the GNSO as you desire
>
> On 29/03/07, Izumi AIZU <iza@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 2007/3/29, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>
>>> My point was that Izumi had seemed to suggest that 1(c) could be skipped
>>> and an issues report requested from the staff. This is not the way
>> it works;
>>> the issues report is requested from the GNSO, who then direct staff to
>>> create one.
>>
>>
>> from the staff, or from an advisory commmtee? I did not suggest to skip
>> 1 c at all. I said I read it.
>>
>> I am fine to move this to public list and also discuss in our meeting.
>>
>> izumi
>>
>>
>> Honestly, this is obviously becoming a very long and probably confusing
>>> thread - quite possibly even for some of us contributing to it - may I
>>> suggest that we actually just discuss this at the meeting later this
>>> afternoon? In front of all the ALSes and the whole committee? And
>> the result
>>> can then be posted.
>>>
>>> On 29/03/07, Vittorio Bertola < vb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I am moving this to the public list, because it is very important.
>>> >
>>> > We can discuss on words, but your interpretation of the text of the
>>> > PDP
>>> > that would require the GNSO Council to approve a request for an Issue
>>> > Report by an Advisory Committee is not what was agreed in year 2002.
>>> > It
>>> > was explicitly said that we were advisory, but we'd have the
>>> > unilateral
>>> > right (of course to be used with care) to put things on the GNSO
>>> > agenda.
>>> > I have even checked this with a GNSO guru during the break, who said
>>> > that there's no way that it can be differently from this - we just
>>> > need
>>> > to phrase the request correctly.
>>> >
>>> > If the ICANN staff stays with that interpretation, and if it is
>>> > confirmed by the GNSO, I would like to raise the issue with the other
>>> > ACs and with the Board to understand whether this is actually the
>>> > intent
>>> > of ICANN at the political level.
>>> >
>>> > Nick Ashton-Hart ha scritto:
>>> > > Your interpretation does not square with the ICANN GC. Note the word
>>> > > 'request' in 1(c). Further, you do not request ICANN Staff for an
>>> > issues
>>> > > report; you send a request to the GNSO as per 1(c).
>>> > >
>>> > > On 29/03/07, *Izumi AIZU* <iza@xxxxxxx <mailto: iza@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Yes, I looked at 1 c. already, as follows,
>>> > >
>>> > > 1 c. /Advisory Committee Initiation./ An Advisory Committee may
>>> > > raise an issue for policy development by action of such
>>> > committee to
>>> > > commence the PDP, and transmission of that request to the GNSO
>>> > Council
>>> > >
>>> > > The "transmission of that request" implies to the commence of
>>> > PDP,
>>> > > but NOT issue report IMHO. So, this does not prevent us from
>>> > > requesting ICANN Staff for Issue Report. Otherwise, there is
>>> > little
>>> > > room for any advisory committee - I cannot imagine GAC accepts
>>> > this
>>> > > and ask GNSO council to reuqest Issue report or RSSAC or SSAC
>>> > does...
>>> > >
>>> > > izumi
>>> > >
>>> > > 2007/3/29, Nick Ashton-Hart < nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > <mailto: nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
>>> > >
>>> > > Look at 1(c). Then look at 2....
>>> > >
>>> > > On 29/03/07, *Vittorio Bertola* < vb@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > <mailto: vb@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Nick Ashton-Hart ha scritto:
>>> > >> Note one error below of process. Quite important not to
>>> > > misstate the process...
>>> > >>
>>> > >> >However, there is a need for more concrete information to
>>> > > prove these
>>> > >> >problems actually exist and are affecting the ordinary
>>> > > users and their
>>> > >> >experience in using the Internet. Therefore ALAC is
>>> > > drafting a formal
>>> > >> >request shortly to ask ICANN staff to prepare an Issue
>>> > > Report. At the same
>>> > >>
>>> > >> This above statement is the problem. What ALAC can do is
>>> > > ask the GNSO
>>> > >> Council to ask for an Issues Report to be prepared.
>>> > >
>>> > > Huh? If you go to
>>> > > http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA
>>> > > < http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA>, point
>>> > > 2, it says that upon the request of "a properly
>>> > supported
>>> > > motion from an
>>> > > Advisory Committee", staff will create an Issue Report,
>>> > > which will then
>>> > > go to the GNSO council together with a recommendation on
>>> > > whether or not
>>> > > to start a PDP. You clarified a few mails ago that
>>> > according
>>> > > to Dan "a
>>> > > properly supported motion" is one that the majority of
>>> > the
>>> > > ALAC approved
>>> > > in a formal vote.
>>> > >
>>> > > I don't know how that can be read differently - are you
>>> > sure
>>> > > that you
>>> > > mean what you wrote? I thought Maria had said that the
>>> > GNSO
>>> > > council
>>> > > needs to approve the starting of a PDP, not the creation
>>> > of
>>> > > an issue report.
>>> > > --
>>> > > vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a]
>>> > bertola.eu
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <--------
>>> >
>>> > --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Nick Ashton-Hart
>>> PO Box 32160
>>> London N4 2XY
>>> United Kingdom
>>> UK Tel: [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif] [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif][image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif] [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif]+44 (20) 8800-1011
>>> USA Tel: [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif] [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif][image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif] [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif]+1 (202) 657-5460
>>> Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135
>>> mobile: [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif] [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif][image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif] [image: Web Bug from
>>> chrome://skype_ff_toolbar_win/content/space.gif]+44 (7774) 932798

>>> Win IM: ashtonhart@xxxxxxxxxxx / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@xxxxxxx /
>>> Skype: nashtonhart
>>> Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> >> Izumi Aizu <<
>>
>> Institute for HyperNetwork Society
>> Kumon Center, Tama University
>> * * * * *
>> << Writing the Future of the History >>
>> www.anr.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> ALAC mailing list
>> ALAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>> www.alac.icann.org
>> www.icannalac.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Regards,
>
> Nick Ashton-Hart
> PO Box 32160
> London N4 2XY
> United Kingdom
> UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011
> USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460
> Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135
> mobile: +44 (7774) 932798
> Win IM: ashtonhart@xxxxxxxxxxx / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@xxxxxxx / Skype:
> nashtonhart
> Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

--
Jacqueline A. Morris
www.jacquelinemorris.com

Re: [At-Large] {Disarmed} Re: Public Forum presentation - draft