[gnso-vi-feb10] chat transcript from the call today

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

> 
>  Sivasubramanian M:Not many participants in the adobe room
>  Phil Buckingham:Alan - Totally agree with this . Are there issue say SRSU 
> that we can get  consensus - that we can get to the Board before Cartegena 
> and so would be included in Final AG - but WHEN is this coming out ??????. 
>  avri:it is alwasy hard for people to let go, even when they know they sould.
>  Alan Greenberg:I think that the principles or areas of general consensus may 
> be reachable perhaps helped by the public comments, but not limited to them.
>  avri:i have no objection to do the work to close phase 1  what i am 
> suggesting is the the group be boxed until the council decides to unbox it 
> and updates its charter in light of some future reality.
>  Alan Greenberg:Phase I vs Phase II was an invention of the workgroup and not 
> Council...  
>  Roberto:Maybe a good old poll on the mailing list on whether the Ph1 work is 
> over or not might do it...
>  Volker Greimann:evening all, and +1
>  Jothan Frakes:Seems like we 'hybernate'
>  Volker Greimann:actually, we are not working to help the board form a 
> position, but under mandate of the GNSO PDP process to find a workable 
> consensus for VI
>  avri:a WG can defne itself as done, stopped, stuck or whatever, whenever it 
> so decides.  It is then up to the manageres to decie what to do next, accpet 
> it, reform it, or whatever in respnse.  we have already informed the council 
> of intetion fo finish up.  we shuld do what we said.  and if we want to 
> continue further, we shuld have consensus of what and how, and should ask the 
> councl for blessing to do so.
>  Volker Greimann:while the board may make a decision without our input, our 
> mandate still exists, IMHO
>  Jothan Frakes:Volker, that's true of any WG, candidly
>  avri:as long as the council says it does and we have a consensus in the 
> group for doing so, i agree.
>  Kristina Rosette:that's an understatement, Alan.
>  Volker Greimann:+1
>  avri:if there is no taste in the council for doing it, then why continue 
> doing it?
>  Eric Brunner-Williams:alan: nicely said
>  Phil Buckingham:Alan +1111 - yes nicely said
>  Alan Greenberg:Something that has not been mentioned yet is that the Board 
> may make different decisions based on whether they believe that it is for 
> round 1 only, or for all of eternity. Not sure if we WANT to think of it from 
> that perspective, but it is one thought.
>  avri:Alan: there is no decsion for all eternity, but any decsions made for 
> round 1, will be in contracts, one assumes.
>  Alan Greenberg:Avri, I agree. "eternity" was poetic license. And yes, round 
> 1 gTLDs will be bound by contracts, although ICANN can always grant new 
> privilges...
>  avri:back to ATRT listening
>  avri:happy turkey day to the candians among us.
>  Volker Greimann:good fight, and good night

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