Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] FW: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from Consumercci-dt

[Alex Gakuru <gakuru@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Margie, ok will do. thanks, Alex.

On 7/28/11, Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Please send it to Gisella and she will post it.
>
> Best regards,
> Margie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Gakuru [mailto:gakuru@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 3:43 PM
> To: Margie Milam; gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] FW: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from
> Consumercci-dt
>
> Thanks Margie,
>
> Where do we post our SOI for this group?
>
> appreciated,
>
> Alex
>
> On 7/28/11, Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Please find below the chat transcript from today's call.   Please note
>> that
>> the next meeting for this DT is scheduled for 10 Aug at 2000 UTC, and
>> will run for 90 minutes.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Margie
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: margie.milam@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:margie.milam@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 3:06 PM
>> To: Margie Milam
>> Subject: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from Consumercci-dt
>>
>>   CLO:Hi all
>>   CLO:*sigh*  pity no one assisted  you in getting it  *right*  Rosemary
>>   CLO:No point inOCL  & I taking it TO  ALAC  to endorse as a CCWG  till
>> GNSO  do what whatever  THEY  so desire   I' ll also hold off on what I
>> was
>> proposing woth ccNSO as well  *SOGH*
>>   CLO:once it starts  work as a pure GNSO CO  WG  I DOUBT it would
>> morph into a CWG  so WHY  would  the other AC's  & SO's  bother  doing
>> other than
>> working our own turf work and so  HAVE  to  spread  our  resources
>> thinky
>>   CLO:THinky  = Thinly ...  So  IF  we were to have a copy of the
>> probable GNSO Charter  to work "with"  that would be most useful....
>>   Margie Milam:I have posted Wendy's suggestion in the Notes section
>> below the agenda
>>   CLO:AI  alsoo would be for GNSO  to also  request  formal and
>> informal
>> (general) ccNSO, ALAC and GAC "membership/ reps"  for the GNSO  WG
>> Consumer Trust Choice andMetrics  work
>>   Rosemary:thanks Margie
>>   CLO:Yes  I agree they are not mutually exclusive  BUT  if we were to
>> just use  ONE  that would not IMO  satisfy *our (where our = end user
>> / consumer / registrant) needs*  to that end  outcomes  that have
>> wider more inclusive definitions to work with would I beleive assist
>> our ability  to meet the AoC desired measurements  better...
>>   CLO:and YES  we need to be careful about  the term supplier to meet
>> pur needs  issue that Steve is raising  now is VERY appointment  re
>> suitabliity to purpose  =>  analogy  consumer care  re utility supply
>> origuin is less than choice of quality suply  that meets their needs
>> preferably where they can get the "best deal to meet their needs
>> sometimes  that means a start with fewer choices and more limited
>> costing diversity  that the changes over time but the utility /service
>> options  will change  this is actually  good for the metrics  use
>> where we can have an assumption  that price points will lowere  or
>> diversity of choice oin price  will continue to occur over time  post gTLD
>> launch
>>   CLO:yep  I agree Jonathan  a measure of course of how price *may*
>> change over time  could be useful for us to  watch / measure as
>> ongoing measure of metrics
>>   Jonathan Zuck:Even though we're talking about "generic" TLDs, this
>> round is truly going to represent a movement towards the specific and
>> away from the generic
>>   Alex Gakuru:sharing two links: 1. http://www.domain-price-wars.com/
>>   Alex Gakuru:2. http://icannwiki.com/index.php?title=Domain_Statistics
>>   Steve DelBianco:Competition: the availability, at reasonable prices
>> and terms, of TLDs in every script and language, from multiple TLD
>> operators.
>> Competition measures would include relative price comparisons,
>> quantitiy of TLD operators, and presence of new entrants as TLD operators.
>>   Jonathan Zuck:percentage of defensive versus useful registrations
>>   Margie Milam:yes-  I'll do it
>>   Steve DelBianco:if we use that as the competition definition, we can
>> move the "suitable" purpose and script terms into  the CHOICE definition
>>   CLO:Carlos  assume the  Joint / Cross Community WG  will NOT happen
>> and this is just  work  for the GNSO one that WILL get chartered
>>   CLO:yes  this is unfortunate  but it is what it is
>>   CLO:issue is we need to get i9n with the work
>>   CLO:having  our discussions  recorded ona public  access Wiki  will
>> help minimise the frustration of repetition aspect of what Carlos raised
>>   Alex Gakuru:@jonathan, will all regitrants be asked if 'defensive'
>> or 'useful' registrations?
>>   CLO:Margie  your both Psycic and a wonder  thanks  saves me asking
>> for just that :-)
>>   Carlos Dionisio Aguirre:.mi position is : if we want to have an
>> inclusive and open joint WG between SO/AC. I think is needed to have
>> the opinions about this concepts coming from differents actors
>> evolved. we are talking about concepts  very complex to define, and
>> the definition will be different from different actors. on the other
>> hand every concept (Competition, Consumer choice & consumer trust) are
>> very related among them, and all of them have to do with different
>> interest. The discussion is very productive, usefull but  not all opinions
>> are here.
>>   Jonathan Zuck:well one measure of a defensive registration might be
>> whether it's a new site or just a pointer . It's not anything we hold
>> anyone to, it's just something to track.
>>   CLO:Well Carlos  that very sticky call is VERY much a GNSO  issue
>> now/atm so as a Coincillor  do your best to GET the GNSO  Council to
>> support the option OF a Joint  or Cross CWG
>>   Jonathan Zuck:@Alex/CLO well one measure of a defensive registration
>> might be whether it's a new site or just a pointer . It's not anything
>> we hold anyone to, it's just something to track.
>>   Carlos Dionisio Aguirre:@Ill try.
>>   CLO:Yes  Jonathan  agreed  that would be a useful  deffinition
>>   Carlos Dionisio Aguirre:@clo Ill try
>>   CLO:  Jonathan  the Board Resolution * I thought*  specified  a
>> request for ADVICE  form the AC & SO's
>>   CLO:I'm OK  with 14 day breaks  and at thiss time is fine
>>   Alex Gakuru:Flexible
>>   Debra Hughes:flexible
>>   Steve DelBianco:2 weeks and this time is okay
>>   john berard:I am OK with every two weeks at this hour
>>   CLO:work it  to best  fit in with Margie
>>   Steve DelBianco:anyone else think we need 90 minutes instead of an hour?
>>   CLO:yup  fine by me
>>   Jonathan Zuck:90 is fine with me
>>   Steve DelBianco:it just seems that we run out of time before we run
>> out of steam at 60 m,inutes
>>   Alex Gakuru:bye all
>>   Debra Hughes:bye
>>
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device