Urgent message re: GNSO Council action on new gTLDs

[Adam Peake]

>I agree with Milton but will add the following.
>
>1) How will transportation be funded?  Will each 
>member pay his/her own way (as
>at ICANN meetings) or can ICANN be pursuaded to make "needs based" funding
>available given the "extraordinary and unanticipated" meeting.  Given that
>members of the NCUC must carefully plan and 
>budget for ICANN meetings, including
>solicitng funds from foundations.  The meeting 
>will also put the Consticuency in
>the position of deciding whether to fund travel to the proposed meeting or
>subsequent ICANN meetings.


I agree with this.  While we might have funds to 
support someone attending this ad hoc meeting, 
those funds were collected to help people attend 
ICANN meetings, where they would be able to 
contribute more and learn more.  I think we must 
make the point that non-commercial and individual 
users cannot plan for these "extraordinary and 
unanticipated" meetings and we object to them 
being held.

However, by all means send 3 local 
representatives (to not attend would be self 
defeating.)

And I hope our councilors will please emphasize 
that Frankfurt is not an ideal location for GNSO 
discussion of internationalized domain names.

Adam




>2) Alternatively, although it is generally not permitted, can the constituency
>designate proxies in DC for the meeting.  Again, while not usually permitted,
>the unexpected and extraordinary nature of this 
>meeting cries out for flexibility. 
>
>Unless the GNSO takes some steps to assist the NCUC to overcome the unique
>burdens imposed by this extraordnary and unexpected meeting, this will
>effectively disenfranchise the non-commercial 
>user consticuency from a critical
>policy debate.  The fact that the meetng is face-to-face demonstrates that
>telephone participation or other electronic 
>means of participation will not suffice.
>
>If the NCUC is unable to participate, the 
>resulting policy will be subsequently
>subject to criticism that it does not adequately consider the views of
>non-commercial users.  Rather than expand effort 
>drafting a policy that would be
>subject to endless post hoc criticism and 
>redrafting, it would be better for the
>GNSO to display flexibility on the funding or representation issues.
>
>
>
>--
>Harold Feld
>Senior Vice President
>Media Access Project