RE: [gnso-rap-dt] Registration abuse definition discussion on at-large list

["Greg Aaron" <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Beau:

Thanks for your note.  The definition is definitely a draft, and there was
agreement that we can revisit it after we "get our feet wet" with some
examples.  On Monday the RAPWG agreed to go with the working definition for
now so that it can discuss scope issues and examine some specific proposed
abuses as a test of the definition, as a learning exercise.  Putting this
process around the definition is also meant to promote an efficient use of
the WG members' time. 

I think it is good that you have solicited comment at ALAC, and sounds like
you'll have resulting material to bring into the RAPWG when we revisit the
definition.  And later, ALAC members will also have an opportunity to post
public comments.

As an aside to all, WG member participation/representation and public
comment periods are the two main ways for thought to be brought into a GNSO
Working Group:
1)  WGs have members from various constituencies and groups.  It is a
member's role to bring in and express ideas from his or her segment of the
community.  
2) GNSO Working Group formal public comment periods.  Those are
opportunities for members of the community to post written comments for
consideration by the WG, for possible integration into its work product.
The RAPWG will have public comment periods at standard intervals, as noted
at:
https://st.icann.org/data/workspaces/reg-abuse-wg/attachments/registration_a
buse_policies_working_group:20090330130812-3-10666/original/WG_ProcessFlow.j
pg

A WG's conference calls and dedicated discussion list are the main place
"where the action is".  We use the tools of WG member
participation/representation and public comment periods to receive and
discuss thought.  Those tools are there to help any WG ensure opportunity
for participation while also remaining focused.  Please let me know how we
are doing on that balancing. 

With best wishes,
--Greg


-----Original Message-----
From: Brendler, Beau [mailto:Brenbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 11:21 AM
To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-rap-dt] Registration abuse definition discussion on at-large
list


Greetings. After our recent phone conference, I posted the definition as
discussed in this WG to the at-large worldwide list for comment and
feedback. Quite a discussion ensued, with posts from Derek Smythe, Karl
Auerbach, John Levine, Evan Leibovitch and many others.

What is the best way to integrate these comments from the at-large community
into this working group discussion? Can I assume you are all on the at-large
worldwide list, and therefore able to monitor the discussion? Or can I ask
someone on staff to put the comments together to include in this WG's
discussion? What I'm trying to avoid here is duplication of effort, and,
frankly, putting together all the comments generated, something I don't have
time at the moment to do. The subject header on the at-large list is
"Definition of registration abuse," with most of the activity taking place
over the last 24 hours.

Beau Brendler

**
This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named
above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any
attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents.  If
you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender
by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from
your computer system.