Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS New gTLD Applicant Support WG Charter

[Alex Gakuru <gakuru@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Cintra,

I am only saying that we choose and decide which of the two (AC/SO) approved
charters shall be our guiding document, that's all.

regards,

Alex

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Cintra Sooknanan <
cintra.sooknanan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Alex,
>
> Can you provide some clarification? Are you suggesting that we re-craft our
> Charter such that it follows the GNSO Charter (so that the scope they
> provided is the common reference point) and then set out our additional
> scope of work be included under a unique (only in ALAC Charter) section?
>
> Regards
>
> Cintra
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:09 AM, Alex Gakuru <gakuru@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Just like the GNSO picks and chooses what recommendations to accept and
>> which ones not to, I believe this is our turn to also pick and choose which,
>> but one, charter to work under? It would be such a mess and multiplication
>> of work to get down to perhaps even pointing out which sentence(s) relates
>> to GNSO or ALAC charter. It would be far more clearer to everyone if have
>> the reference point from the onset. Recalling how often the WG  kept
>> referring to the Board's Nairobi resolution for guidance.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Given the amount of time that the GNSO has taken (discussion time, not
>>> elapsed), I do not see much interest in re-opening this discussion in the
>>> near future. If the ALAC decides to (basically) stay where it is with its
>>> charter (perhaps adding the IDN issue), then there can be some discussion
>>> between the ALAC and GNSO, although I do not quite know what format such
>>> discussions would take. Ultimately, for the GNSO to adopt a more liberal
>>> Charter, it will take a vote of the Council and I do not see such a vote
>>> passing.
>>>
>>> I have not thought this through or discussed it with anyone, but the only
>>> path forward that seems to make sense is for the WG to continue and in its
>>> final report, make it crystal clear which recommendations fall under which
>>> charter(s) allowing the parent bodies to adopt their part if they wish.
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>> At 17/01/2011 09:42 PM, Andrew Mack wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I too am concerned that the Neuman draft is too limiting and was
>>> disappointed that this became an issue.  I agree that taking all discussion
>>> of real money off the table overly limits our discussion and is unlikely to
>>> move us forward as we'd like.  That said, it does seem that there should be
>>> some sort of compromise possible in the wordsmithing, since as Alan says the
>>> GNSO version is mostly contained in the ALAC version.
>>>
>>> As for what Eric says below, while there wasn't full consensus on what
>>> work we'd do to support minority languages and scripts, I didn't read our
>>> report as saying we shouldn't continue with the work.  As there are at least
>>> a few of us that would like to continue this -- and since it affects so many
>>> people and clearly has some GNSO support -- I would like to see us keep it
>>> on our list.
>>>
>>> My apologies as I won't be able to be on the call tomorrow, but will be
>>> there for the next one.
>>> Regards, Andrew
>>>
>>> *Andrew A. Mack*
>>> *Principal
>>> *AMGlobal Consulting
>>>
>>> +1-202-642-6429  amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW  First Floor
>>> Washington, DC 20036
>>> www.amglobal.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> *To:* Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> *Cc:* ALAC Working List <alac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; JAS <
>>> soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> *Sent:* Fri, January 14, 2011 12:19:14 PM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS New gTLD Applicant Support WG
>>> Charter
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Alan.
>>>
>>> I don't recall how something we spent as much time on as minority
>>> languages was excluded from the proposed charter that Rafiq proposed to the
>>> Names Council, but that is water under the bridge.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>
>