Danny:
I'm impressed by your energy but very disappointed by your decision to
completely alter established NCUC positions. 

The constituency has over the course of the last 6 months staked out a
clear and consensual position on the renewal issue. You have completely
abandoned that, despite no indications of support from others in the
constituency, and come up with an entirely new and different position.
The position is very complicated, based on ccTLD procedures, and takes
the registrar constituency position on rebids. 

That's not the way things can be done here. Please refer to the
existing NCUC statement on renewal expectancy, 
http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0604&L=ncuc-discuss&T=0&O=D&X=6285946F42781A231F&Y=mueller%40syr.edu&P=6368


and also to the notes of the NCUC meeting in Marrakech, drafted by
Carlos. 
http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0606&L=ncuc-discuss&T=0&O=D&X=1988C02DA913349905&Y=mueller%40syr.edu&P=8740


Any position must use these discussions and drafts as a starting point.


The Marrakech meeting discussed these positions extensively. That was
in fact the largest real-time grouping of constituency members in some
time. It is unacceptable to trash that work.

Please do not submit this report to the Rapporteur group, or to anyone
else, otherwise the constituency will have to disavow it and that will
make us all look ridiculous, and undermine your credibility in the
process. 

I have only read the renewal part. Since that was completely orthogonal
to what we have discussed and written so far, I fear going any further.
As time permits, I'll read the rest of it but can't say that I am
looking forward to it. 

Really, Danny, show some respect for the fact that this is a
CONSTITUENCY that needs to develop positions as a group. 


>>> Danny Younger <[log in to unmask]> 10/17/2006 8:24 AM >>>
Dear all,

A formal NCUC Statement has been prepared covering the
following topics:

1)  gTLD renewal policy
2)  policy for gtld Consensus Policy limitations
3)  gTLD price control policy
4)  policy for ICANN fees pertaining to gTLDs
5)  policy on the use of gTLD registry data 
6)  gTLD development/infrastructure investment policy

This statement is attached as a twenty (20) page Word
document.  The statement has already been forwarded to
the NCUC Policy Committee for review and now awaits
your constituency member comments, suggested
modifications, and/or partial or complete revisions.

Per the timetable established by Rapporteur Groups A &
B, our final work-product must be submitted by 24
October in order to be included in the Final Report
submitted to the GNSO PDP Task Force on Contractual
Conditions for Existing Registries.

As the views of our constituency will not necessarily
coincide with those expressed by other constituencies,
it is important that a cogent Minority Report makes
its way to the ICANN Board via the GNSO's Final
Report.

Each paragraph has been numbered for ease of
discussion, and all member comments will be referenced
in the final version of this document.

I look forward to your assistance in properly
presenting the NCUC view on these matters.

Thank you for your assistance,
Danny Younger
isoc-ny

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com