Transparency and the negotiations between the Board and the GAC on new gTLDs

[Adam Peake]

Hi,

I just sent a similar note to the At Large list encouraging
endorsement of the letter.  I hope such meetings would anyway be open
by default --GAC meetings have been recently-- but it's worth pushing.

Also made a comment to At Large about the date of the intersessional
meeting the NCSG might like to consider:

"No idea if the comment that the meeting will be held in Geneva at the
end of February is correct.  But if At Large does support the letter
it might also say that should the Board wish to launch the new gTLD at
the San Francisco meeting (and given the years of process a decision
during later teleconference would be a disappointment), holding such
discussions at the end of February would leave too little time for
public comment. It will take some days for staff to take the results
of the Board/GAC discussion into account and publish a final applicant
guide book. The community must have ample time to comment and
participate to the fullest extent possible in the process.  As stated
in the workplan adopted in October 2010
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/new-gtld-work-plan-28oct10-en.pdf
> a final 30 day public comment period is required."

Best,

Adam


On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Avri Doria <avri at ltu.se> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/icann_board_gac_geneva_meeting_open_to_observers/>
>
> Contains an appeal to the Board and GAC to open their talks in Geneva to both on-site and remote participation.  As I understand it,  this is becoming a petition.  I have already offered my personal support and was wondering whether the NCSG would be interested or willing to support the petition.
>
> I suggest members comment on the discussion list  so that the NCSG Policy Committee can make a decision based on those discussions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> a.