RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Punting to Council
- To: "'Avri Doria'" <avri@xxxxxxx>, "'gnso-osc-ops'" <gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Punting to Council
- From: "Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:41:37 -0400
I apologize again for having to get off the call.
Regarding the string below, I don't have a problem with pushing this request
to Council to make, but I DO want to be sure that ultimately the list we are
looking for is produced. Anything less is an affront to all of the
volunteers that put in so many hours and hours of work week in and week out
for the good of the institution of ICANN and larger community of Internet
users. In this light, having ICANN staff tell the community 'we will not
tell you with whom we are contracted' is untenable. In fact, it starts to
smell like 3-day-old fish to me.
Sorry to be so strong in my language, but ICANN is either the transparent
organization I signed on to participate in or its not. This is where the
rubber meets the road.
Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.
220 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10001
+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11
From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:23 PM
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] yet more words
As response to the request for ICANN to list all companies it has contracts.
While such a list would be helpful to a participant in filling out their
SOI, ICANN has indicated that they would have difficulty in producing such a
list. It is suggested that the requirement pertains to the participants and
requires a review of their or their company's relationships with ICANN. The
WT also believes that a requirements for ICANN to produce any such list,
should the council decide that it is needed, should come from the council