You wrote:
> Roberto and all,
>
> Some humble suggestions.
> If you give voting rights to participants in one list, (and announce it on
> the other lists) everybody interested in voting on the substantial issues
> will gravitate to that list.
> This will benefit your discussion on substance.
> OTOH, to ask for comments to a one-way email adress (proposals@dnso.org)
> will not allow people to see each other's comments and discourages
> submissions.
> Better to keep the comments coming to the discuss@ list.
>
The idea was to publish on the Web site comments sent to proposals@dnso.org.
Nevertheless, I see your point here.
My first reaction will be: comments to proposals@dnso.org, discussion (and
possibly tally) in discuss@dnso.org.
> I was also disappointed about the lack of substance on the discuss list.
> An
> early posting about the fee structure was simply ignored.
> But unfortunately the openness discussion was justified.
> The best course of action will now be to see if you can bridge the
> differences with the dnso.net bylaws and bring the people together.
> It will not be easy.
>
I know it will not be easy.
But people will eventually come together. The point is more "how" and "when"
than "if".
> Not me or the Domain Name Owners in general. I know NSI is laughing all
> the way to the bank.
> But in my humble view the question of ICANN's authority and mandate needs
> to be settled first before the SO's can fall into place.
>
You may be right, but I hate the idea of sitting on my hands and waiting for
something beyond my control to happen.
Let's put it this way: even if a DNSO may not be empowered as soon as we may
hope (i.e. at the ICANN Singapore meeting), this discussion will not be lost
time - we would have had it sooner or later.
Also, I think that ICANN is monitoring what's going on here, and the flow of
the messages is giving them already a rough idea of what they can expect for
the MAC.
> We had a 5 December "deadline" on applications for ICANN's MAC.
> We are still waiting for the MAC members to introduce themselves and start
> the promised public deliberations.
>
I assume that even if only a subset of the team had some holidays in the
last forthnight the whole group could not have advanced very much.
We already know who they are - I would expect a first public report around
mid-next-week.
Regards
Roberto