ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-dt-wg]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-dt-wg] RE: Domain Tasting - Outcomes Report version 1.4

  • To: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>, Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>, Jeffrey Eckhaus <jeckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx, gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] RE: Domain Tasting - Outcomes Report version 1.4
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:24:34 -0700 (PDT)

Weighing in on the 4.3 discussion.

I am not neutral as to where in the document this text
is placed -- I view the registrar submission as a
result of a polling initiative that in fairness should
be placed alongside other poll results.

To the same degree that survey respondents were given
the opportunity to provide open-ended textual
comments, so too should we regard this submission as a
textual comment for inclusion in an appropriate poll
results section of the document.  Issues of veracity
(or the lack thereof) should not figure into our
discussions as this standard is not being applied to
the other open-ended textual comments that have been
tendered.

regards,
Danny

P.S.  My apologies for not having the text for 4.4
ready yet... I've been working non-stop on the RAA
Revisions project, but I am expecting to have some
text ready for Olof within the next 24 hours.







--- "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Kristina,
> 
>  
> 
> Your statement about having to trust the registrars
> because they are our
> customers is completely out of line and untrue. 
> Registries and
> registrars are not always aligned...and in fact,
> there are many times
> where we are diametrically opposed.  So, I would ask
> that your refrain
> from such statements.  Not only is it untrue, but it
> only detracts from
> the mission of the group.
> 
>  
> 
> That said,  I would propose that it be in the main
> body and drop a
> footnote stating that the IPC objects (or at least
> Kristina objects).
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
> Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & 
> 
> Business Development 
> 
> NeuStar, Inc. 
> e-mail: Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Rosette, Kristina [mailto:krosette@xxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 9:26 PM
> To: Neuman, Jeff; Olof Nordling; Jeffrey Eckhaus;
> owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] RE: Domain Tasting -
> Outcomes Report version
> 1.4
> 
>  
> 
> Section 4.3 goes far beyond listing the ways in
> which "participating"
> registrars claim to use the AGP, and provides far
> more than
> "information".  That is part of my objection to it.
> 
>  
> 
> You have to trust the registrars and their reps -
> they're your
> customers.  I do not have to do so.  Moreover, there
> is nothing in
> Section 4.3 that provides any basis for me to trust
> the veracity of its
> contents.  
> 
>  
> 
> I maintain my objection.
> 
>  
> 
> Kristina
> 
>       
> ________________________________
> 
> 
>       From: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx] 
>       Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 9:11 PM
>       To: Olof Nordling; Jeffrey Eckhaus; Rosette,
> Kristina;
> owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>       Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] RE: Domain Tasting -
> Outcomes Report
> version 1.4
> 
>       All,
> 
>       
>       The purpose of this exercise was to get all the
> facts out on the
> table.  The fact is that registrars use the AGP for
> a number of
> different purposes and section 4.3 lists some of
> them.  Personally, I
> don't think it matters how this information was
> derived.  I trust that
> the registrars and their reps would not submit false
> information to the
> working group and I think the rest of the group
> should have that same
> level of trust.  If the registrars in our group can
> certify that these
> responses were actually given by themselves or other
> registrars, why
> should we shove their responses in an Annex?  
> 
>        
> 
>       This is not a court of law where we are determining
> admissible
> evidence from hearsay.  We are not a jury judging
> the reliability of
> answers given.  We have one task and that is to
> gather information so
> that the council can make an informed decision on
> whether to invoke a
> pdp or not.
>       
>       If Jothan, Tim, Jeff and the other registrar reps
> will certify
> to us that these were the actual responses (or a
> summary of the
> responses), that should be enough.  If this were a
> pdp, this would be
> different.
> 
>       
>       I believe 4.3 needs to stay in the main body.
> 
>        
> 
>        
> 
>        
> 
>       Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
>       Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & 
> 
>       Business Development 
> 
>       NeuStar, Inc. 
>       e-mail: Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>  
> 
>       
> ________________________________
> 
> 
>       From: owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Olof Nordling
>       Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 5:14 PM
>       To: 'Jeffrey Eckhaus'; 'Rosette, Kristina';
> owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>       Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] RE: Domain Tasting -
> Outcomes Report
> version 1.4
> 
>        
> 
>       Jeff and all,
> 
>       It's not really a matter if "ICANN staff" (=me,
> Olof) having an
> issue with anything, rather that there are views in
> the ad hoc group
> that "ICANN staff" tries to reconcile in order to
> get a report out with
> the support of the group as a whole.
> 
>       Cheers
> 
>       Olof
> 
>        
> 
>       
> ________________________________
> 
> 
>       From: owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Jeffrey Eckhaus
>       Sent: den 30 september 2007 22:28
>       To: Rosette, Kristina; olof nordling;
> owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>       Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] RE: Domain Tasting -
> Outcomes Report
> version 1.4
> 
>        
> 
>       All,
> 
>        
> 
>       I agree with Tim Ruiz on this issue, the Registrars
> were asked
> for an "Opinion Polling of Registrars regarding
> AGP". The statements
> that have been provided are exactly what was
> requested. 
=== message truncated ===



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy