Your Letter of Invitation to the January 22 meeting answers a few of the
questions I posed on January 9, but bypasses mention of the January 21
pre-meeting. Because openness and transparency are goals to which this
process reportedly subscribes, would you please respond directly to the
following questions, so that I may post your answers on the dnso-discuss
list.
1. What was the criteria for being a coordinating organization of the
January 22 DNSO formulation meeting? Why are no organizations that operate
in the public interest included as sponsors?
2. Who determined what organizations to invite to the January 21
meeting? Did any invitees decline participation? Did any organizations
requesting inclusion in this meeting get turned down? If so, on what
basis?
3. How was the invitation to the january 21 meeting presented, i.e.,
was there a specific agenda to get the commercial sponsors together to
discuss, negotiate and coordinate positions, any specific funding requested
(although it says the meeting is self-supporting), other
concerns/requirements to participate?
4. What are the objectives of the January 21 meeting?
5. Has an agenda for the January 22 meeting been determined? If so,
by whom, and if not, when will it be and by whom?
6. Who are the "DNSO members" that are mentioned as decisionmakers of
these issues? Am I a member if I participate on the DNSO-discuss list but
cannot afford to attend these meetings? Must money change hands to be
eligible to vote? What is the limit to attendance at the Jan. 22 meeting?
How many will be participating in the Jan. 21 pre-meeting.
7. If the goal is to arrive at a broad-based consensus on the draft bylaws for
the DNSO, how will that consensus defined and determined (voice vote, show
of hands? one person=one vote?) by this group? Will those who cannot
attend this meeting be given a channel for providing input and
participating in the consensus determination? Why does consensus need to
be announced at a physical meeting and not withheld until those online
actually get to contribute to the discussion? For example, incorporation.
This probably isn't merely a gut decision but one that should be answered
based on some political and legal realities. Why not post those realities
so that INFORMED consensus can be ascertained.
8. What role does the WIPO study play in the establishment of a DNSO?
Will it be discussed during the meeting?
9. How can independent enterprises and individual domain registrants
(collectively a very large constituency) have a true voice in these
negotiations?
Ellen Rony Co-author
The Domain Name Handbook http://www.domainhandbook.com
================================ // ===================================
ISBN 0879305150 *=" ____ / +1 (415) 435-5010
erony@marin.k12.ca.us \ ) Tiburon, CA
// \\ "Carpe canine"