RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Call for agenda items

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

It would be helpful if the proponents take this 5 minutes presentation as
the outline of a case study, that the members of the WG could take as
example for furhter debate. The worst thing that could happen, IMHO, is if
this turns out into a sort of a "beauty contest" among different proposals
or, worse, into the dress rehearsal of a future presentation to the Board of
their actual business case.
I am sure that none of the presenters had this in mind, but I cannot help
going back to 2000, when I was chairing the GA during the ICANN meeting in
LA when the Board had to decide the first slot of new gTLDs.....
Cheers,
Roberto



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
> Sent: Saturday, 03 April 2010 16:10
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Call for agenda items
> 
> 
> good deal.  
> 
> i've been having a sidebar conversation about a possible 
> proposal and came up with a little series of questions.  what 
> if each proponent took 5-10 minutes to walk us through their 
> ideas, touching on these questions in addition to whatever 
> else they want to tell us.  at least for me, i sometimes find 
> it helpful to write a series of "FAQ-like" questions and then 
> answer them as a way to quickly sketch out an idea.  anyway, 
> here's a starter-kit, feel free to add/subtract...
> 
> Pretty-Good Proposal FAQ:
> 
> - what is the proposal?
> 
> - are there changes needed in the Board resolution for this to work?
> 
> - is this a policy thing or a best-practices thing?
> 
> - what are the barriers in the way of doing this?
> 
> - what are the pros and cons?
> 
> - how do consumers fare?  
> 
> - is there experience out there already?  how about research 
> or analysis?  any "foundation" documents that could be referenced?
> 
> mikey
> 
> 
> On Apr 2, 2010, at 5:24 PM, Richard Tindal wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Would be good for the proponent of each model to take 5 minutes and 
> > walk us through the detail of their proposal.  Not the pros 
> and cons 
> > (yet) -- just how their proposal  would work
> > 
> > Also, would be good to start with a quick re-statement of 
> definitions - so we're all speaking the same language. I've 
> seen cross-ownership and vertical integration used 
> interchangeably on this list,  though the WG has defined them 
> differently.
> > 
> > RT
> > 
> > 
> > On Apr 3, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> hi all,
> >> 
> >> we have a few agenda items (that won't take long and can 
> go towards the end of the agenda) for the call next Monday.  
> most of the time can be devoted to whatever you all would 
> like to discuss.
> >> 
> >> how would you like to use the time?  
> >> 
> >> the proposals, use-cases and scenarios seem to be evolving 
> nicely on the list.  would a discussion of some of those be 
> useful?  any proposal-champions want some real-time 
> discussion time with the whole group?
> >> 
> >> are there background documents that would provide a good 
> discussion?
> >> 
> >> we're building the agenda right now, so this is a good 
> time to steer us towards things that would help you advance your work.
> >> 
> >> thanks,
> >> 
> >> mikey
> >> 
> >> 
> >> - - - - - - - - -
> >> phone      651-647-6109  
> >> fax                866-280-2356  
> >> web        www.haven2.com
> >> handle     OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, 
> Facebook, Google, etc.)
> >> 
> >> 
> 
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone         651-647-6109  
> fax           866-280-2356  
> web   www.haven2.com
> handle        OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, 
> Facebook, Google, etc.)
>