Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

i cheerfully defer to Roberto's vastly deeper experience on this topic.  :-)

mikey


On Apr 28, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> 
> 
> Maybe something I can add to the discussion would at least partially answer
> the question.
> I cannot say ""who decided, and when, to put one, or both, of "single
> registrant" and "relaxation of the vertical separation" issues, on the
> policy development agenda"", but having been the Board Vice-Chair at that
> time I can tell you that these items have been included in discussions,
> presentations, documentation before the Board way before mid-2008. The
> discussion at the Board level was not triggered by the single document Eric
> quotes, which does not diminuishes his right to ask for reference to it, but
> surely makes it less relevant for the WG and most probably lower in the
> prioritized list of items to be done by staff.
> In summary, I would not endorse use of VI-WG staff time in doing this task,
> although it would be a legitimate request to ICANN as a whole, as part of
> the transparency policy, but this is not the right place where to address
> this request.
> Of course, if there is a consistent group of members dissenting with my
> opinion, and endorsing this request, I might change my mind. Absent this, I
> strongly believe that we have already so much to do, and to ask staff to do,
> that we need to be extremely careful in creating additional burden.
> 
> <Disclaimer> I did not consult with the co-chair, I am ready to stand
> corrected if he has a different opinion
> 
> Cheers,
> Roberto
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Liz Gasster
>> Sent: Wednesday, 28 April 2010 23:10
>> To: Eric Brunner-Williams; Margie Milam
>> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with 
>> the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC
>> 
>> 
>> Mike, Roberto and all,
>> 
>> Does the group request that staff pursue the CRAI-related 
>> information noted below?   If so we would be glad to look 
>> into it further, but because staff resources are limited, I 
>> want to make sure our efforts are focused on the top priority 
>> tasks of the group.
>> 
>> Thanks, Liz
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric 
>> Brunner-Williams
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:56 PM
>> To: Margie Milam
>> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with 
>> the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC
>> 
>> 
>> Margie,
>> 
>> A follow-up note.
>> 
>> Over in the High Security TLD Advisory Group Greg Rattray (ICANN
>> Staff) has managed to locate the original letter that Paul 
>> Twomey submitted to BITS (June/July 2009) which Michael 
>> Palage requested as that letter, in his words (which I agree 
>> with) "appears to be the original genesis of this group's 
>> [the HSTLD-AG] work."
>> 
>> I request that the information provided to CRAI, the ICANN 
>> provided scope statement to CRAI, which presumably is 
>> reflected in the work product we know as the CRAI Report of 
>> Q4 2008, and which I think appears to be the original genesis 
>> of this group's [the GNSO-VI-Feb10 PDP] work, be dug up and 
>> provided to me.
>> 
>> Others may have an interest in it as well, I don't know, I 
>> simply know my own interests.
>> 
>> I suspect it is in correspondence. Some time mid-2008.
>> 
>> I want to know who decided, and when, to put one, or both, of 
>> "single registrant" and "relaxation of the vertical 
>> separation" issues, on the policy development agenda.
>> 
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Eric

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)