ICANN-Montevideo Public Forum - September 9, 2001

Nickname - Message
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:39) Folks, the meeting has just begun.
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:40) Thanks Ben - got the stream now
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:40) All streaming media feeds are operational, all links are operational, and all remote participation facilities should be in place at this time.
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:40) M. Katoh's presentation on IDN is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/idn.html and is linked off the agenda for the meeting
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:48) morning all
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) morning sotiris
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) Hello Sotiris
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) what time is it where you are?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) 7:30am
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) 7:40
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) where are you?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:49) Toronto
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) Oh! Why did I think you were in EU?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) what is going on?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) dunno
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) vp of Uroguay
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) ah
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) no translation for us
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) not in the budget
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:50) I'm sure it's stirring
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:51) who is using HansKraaijenbrink's nick?
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:51) he is
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:51) ah
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:52) Video is broken :-(
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:52) I have it okay, Keith
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:52) me2
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:53) try backup
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:53) anyone here speak espanol?
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:53) Keith, if you're ever having a technical problem and wish for assistance in getting it fixed, I'm afraid you'll find you have to be considerbly more specific regarding the specific nature of the problem as well as the specific signal giving you the problem.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:53) With that information, we'll do our best to be of assistance.
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 07:53) Its ok Ben - just a break in transmission - its back now
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:01) Hi all...
<ClaudioValenti> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:01) Ben: There is not sound on the spanish version, Roque
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:02) Claudio/Roque, thanks. We'll get this fixed ASAP. (It was working yesterday!...)
<ClaudioValenti> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:03) ok
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:03) The presentation being made in Open Microphone by Keith Teare is avaialble at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/idn-openmike.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:04) Good Morning
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:04) Hi Joe
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:04) Hi Alango
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:05) Anything exciting happen yesterday?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:05) got booted..
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:05) Pindar Wong's presentation on the ALSC is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/alsc-pf.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:06) Claudio/Roque, and anyone else interested in the Spanish feed, we have now corrected the problem. Our apologies.
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:06) getting a 404
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:07) Joe, just a minute.
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:07) thanks
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:07) (Files are still uploading -- it's a bigger file than you might think!)
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:08) I'm sure.. Thanks
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:10) Pindar's slides have finished uploading now. Thanks for your patience!
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:11) Thanks Rebecca
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:12) At which page is Wong at right now?
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:12) "To Launch AL Membership"
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:12) Thks.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:15) FYI there is someone on the scribe list impersonating me. I am not using LeahGallegos
<RoniBass> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:15) hello
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:15) Hi Roni
<RoniBass> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:15) hi
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:19) Ben, I am using the main feed and when I use dcc chat it shows up on the dual pane scribe section
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:20) instead of scrib's notes
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:20) Leah, this sounds like a problem peculiar to the particular software you're using. Accordingly, I'd prefer to do tech support for you in some other forum -- via email, or via private messaging, but not in a way that bothers everyone else here.
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:21) At Large needs more time to find its rythym???
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:22) Did anyone underline that the criteria for the diversification of those 6 regions might be something else than geography?
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:24) Other forms of diversification were discussed yesterday in the Names Council, but not specifically relative to the At Large Membership and its elected Directors.
<venimarkovski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:26) hi. is it possible to ask questions to the session from here?
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:26) Thanks John, I'll try to find those scribe's notes now then...
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:26) Yes veni - go back to the agenda and follow the link for remote questiosn
<venimarkovski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:26) a, ok, I've found it already - http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/realtime/ask.asp
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:26) Lovely, thanks...
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:27) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/realtime/ask.asp
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:27) See IV C 2.
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:27) Is the link
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:27) Thks.
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:28) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/scribe-nc-090801.html
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:30) Sorry, what does that "UDRP" abbr. is for?
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:30) Uniforn Dispute Resolution Process
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:30) Uiform Dispute Resolution Policy
<venimarkovski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:31) only 14 people today... 3 more than yesterday.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:31) Thanks...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:31) surprising, but it is early in the morning. Maybe we'll have more later
<venimarkovski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:31) I will leave to open some more space:-) and continue to listen to the webcase. it's a little bit disappointing at this time. morining in the US, afternoon in Europe, evening in Japan...
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:33) Its Monday morning (12.30am) here in New Zealand
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:33) 15.40 p.m. in Istanbul
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:35) A funny question now: Is the ICANN board membership paid or voluntarily basis?
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:36) Board membership is and wil be on a voluntary basis
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:37) I see, thanks...
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:37) Note that there are numerous people watching the webcast who are not participating in the real-time discussion. See http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/realtime/viewremoteparticipants.asp
<DavidMiller> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:42) ben, we are in the audience at the conference and we want to submit a disk with some slides for the record and to accompany a question we have later at the open mike. Similiar to what Keith Tear of real Names did. How do we do that
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:44) David, please come see John Palfrey at the technical table.
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:47) Avniye - re your question on ICANN board fees - I understand that there are no directors fees payable, except for reimbursement to attend the meetings, and some of the board don't claim their reimbursements anyway
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:49) Keith, you mean by filling that form ??
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:51) No Avniye - the board is voluntary, not paid.
<DavidMiller> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:51) i can email it to John Palfrey from my seat if that works for you John.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:52) Thanks Keith...
<rb> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:56) hello
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:56) hi rb
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 08:59) Will be some English notes of what this gentleman asking?
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:00) Is he R. Gaetano?
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:00) yes
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:01) David, as discussed, we need to abide by the policy that slides during public comment may only be projected if essential to making a point, and in no case may a full PPT presentation be given. We can submit your slides to the record. Thanks for your understanding.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:03) It will take a lot more outreach than re-sending email to past participants. Many email addresses have changed since then
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:10) Hi Judith
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:11) Morning y'all. Who is speading right now?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:11) (speaking)
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:12) Elliot Noss (Tucows)
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:13) Hi Judith
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:13) I aggree with him 100%
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:13) That's *Elliot*?! Hi Keith, Leah.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:14) I couldn't see the speakers list here: "http://www.icann.org/montevideo/#agenda"
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:14) Elliot's getting paid.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:15) Sad.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:15) Leah, what have I missed?
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:16) The President of Uruguay first!
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:16) Speakers are coming up to the microphone in response to the ALSC report, so are not listed in advance. Their names appear in the real-time scribe's notes.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:17) Thks. John
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:19) This is Alan Davidson, CDT.
<Keith_Davidson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:20) Here here Alan....
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:27) back
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:27) hi all
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:27) Hi Sot
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:27) Hi
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:27) have i missed much?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:29) what?!?!'
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:30) Is today the Pindar Wong show? Has there been much public input?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:30) are they taking remote comments? have they asked any remote questions?
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:32) They have not yet I think...
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:33) We have taken a remote comment.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:33) On the broadcast page, see section "How to Read" - "Real-Time Comments" - "Substantive"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:34) yes, I know, thanks Ben.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:34) See the check mark next to Leah's comment, indicating that it was read.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:34) And it's in scribe's notes.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:35) good for Leah!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:35) what was the answer?
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:38) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/realtime/showcomments.asp?sort=desc&mode=sub
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:38) Hey Joop!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:39) my question: Pindar,
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:39) Do you see the proposed ALSO as a body which negates the need for an Individual's Constituency within the Domain Name Support Organization?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:39) I hope they ask it.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:39) hello Sotiris. Well we have a interesting group together. good morning again, Hans, hell Judith and Leah
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:40) Hi Joop
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:40) are you in the meeting Joop?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:40) Joop, what is your opinion of how things are going?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:40) Sotiris, I have raised this point with the ALSC and I was boiling that they at first did not reply to it voluntarily
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:41) I had to press Carl Bildt, Esther and Pindar individually on this point
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:41) and?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:41) I thought the official language of the board was to be English.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) i's the token gesture
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) Ditto Abril
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) Then it should be translated for the webcast
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) Bildt remained wishy washy and I was only partially satisfied with Pindar's and Esther's response.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) Leah, we did want to translate the signal for the webcast.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) Unfortunately, the technical implementation here made that somewhat harder than we had anticipated
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:42) ... and as a result we were unable to do so.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:43) I hope scribe's notes (and the English answer) provide a general sense of what was said in Spanish.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:43) Tucows statement, April, 2000: "What we are actually observing in the saga of domain name expansion is a power-grab of major proportions over the architecture of the Internet, using ICANN not so much as a representative forum for IP interests as the embodimenet of IP lawyers interests. This tendency is not good for the Net, for Internet users, [or] for small businesses ...
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:43) It does, it does...
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:43) Elliot has a short memory.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:43) Unfortunately a general sense many times loses important language
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:44) nothing surprising
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:44) I'm sure
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:44) *to what Ben's said*
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:45) no, the ALSC has been commissioned by the Board, is answeable to the Board and we hav to persuade the members of the Board that see the DNSO as something to be replaced by and SO structure at Board level that this is REALLY not a good idea.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:45) I hope Hans will comment on this here.. :-)
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:46) Joop, when you're commissioned by someone, you deliver what they asked for.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:46) well, I submitted the question
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:46) let's see if it will be asked
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:46) Judith: we have no record of what *really* has been asked for.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:46) Yes, Sotiris, I read it. Let's hope
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:46) Joop, are the questions/comments listed on a screen for the participants who are there in person?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:47) Sotiris and Judith, I am not sure how each Board member curently thinks. It is not a given that the majority wants to do away with the DNSO
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:48) The scribe notes are up on screen.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:48) Its clear what the "board" (staff) wants. Actions speak louder than words, and there are no surprises in a report that only pays lip service to public influence.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:48) Joop, how do you feel about having an ALSO as opposed to statutory members?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:48) Isn't that a core issue?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:49) I would like to see that brought up at this meeting
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:49) I don't think we will ever see the day that ICANN will have statutoory members, unless it is moved outside of the US, or at least outside California.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:49) Speakers from Africa are making some excellent points.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:49) Their points are applauded. Is the audio connection good?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:49) Joop, we will not see it if it is not considered a prioity by the public
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:49) (priority)
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:50) Leah, the public is limited to at the most 5000 individuals at the moment
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:50) Here comes your question
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:50) that would be 5000 members with rights of membership
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:51) Pindar has really picked up my points of yesterday
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:51) Why is Wong so married to what is only a "draft" position "seeking outreach input"?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:51) Issue: the future of the DNSO is unclear...
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:51) This: perhaps we have to look more... is worrisome
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:52) yes
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:52) quite
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:52) perhaps it's a done deal judith
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:53) I have made it clear that if the role of Individual DNH is limited to director election, they can expect sustained opposition and continuing demands for meaningful participation on policy issues
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:53) In any case, Joop, when you have only "advisory" bodies to the board and no "members" you still have a situation where the majority is many times ignored, as we have now.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:54) Yes. for example the IP lobby should not even be there as an active force in the DNSO. It would be much better if they were not part of the balance, but only there in an advisory capacity
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:55) The fear of the board was stated quite well with the "fear of crazies" getting board seats.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:55) Yes. The battle for control over the IDNO has been constantly paineted as : what if the crazies take over"
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:55) Crazies like you or me or Karl Auerbach
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:55) or me?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:55) lol
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:56) sure, Sotiris :)
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:56) This is where f2f participation comes in. On-line faceless personalities induce fear
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:56) Anyone who believes that users should have substantial say in policy decisions.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:56) ok, we've really got to get our collective house in order
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:56) if we want f2f
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:56) we need cash
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:57) the word users itself is already negative in connotation
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:57) joop, it is indeed unfortunate
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:57) Joop, the IP lobby has it already figured out. With users given only one third, yesterday Marilyn Cade said IP lobby are "providers": *policy* providers.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:57) Cash is the thing to talk f2f with interested businesses. Tucows gave a clear opening, did you notice?3
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:58) I missed it.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:58) And my old friend Don Telage is back at Verisign. (Yes, don't snicker..)
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:59) Judith, you are really talking about the most sensitive point. How *can* one sideline a 2 billion dollar Lobby industry???
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 09:59) Is there any survey done so far to see how is ICANN perceived by the individuals, ngo's etc???
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:00) Thank you Ben :) for the translation broadcast
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:00) Tansug, the NGO's of the NAIS spoke pretty clearly. What more do you need?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:00) It 's hard to survey, Avniye. All they get is lots of negative input, so they have developed a bit of a fortress mentality.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:01) Well, I just was reading Joanna's and others comments on the Internetstaleholders site... that's why...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:01) Joop, the 2 billion dollar lobby must be fought with a 2 billion dollar lobby. Now let's find it.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:02) -stakeholders-
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:02) We'll try to streamline the process of switching to translation for the rest of the day.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:02) tks ben :)
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:02) Joop, re ip lobby, seems like ALSC may be trying to sideline it by giving users only 1/3 vote. But not to the benefit of users overall.
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:02) The GAC Commiunique is linked off the agenda for this meeing and is available at http://www.icann.org/committees/gac/communique-09sep01.htm
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:03) Ben, link = page cannot be found.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:03) Judith, I like to get back on that later. I like to listen to the GAC report,. there has been some heat in the GAC yesterday. They went on until 11 pm.
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:03) Rebeccs I have question still left from the "Digital Discovery" webcasting. Would you give me an e-mail?
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:04) I misspelled committees in scribe's notes, initially. Should work now.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:11) Joop, what was the nature of the heat at yesterday's GAC?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:17) ad hoc measures?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:17) extralegal measures. illegal measures.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:18) ISO 3166-1?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:19) http://www.egt.ie/standards/iso3166/iso3166-1-en.html
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:19) ISO 3166-1: The Code List
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:19) got it
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:19) thanx
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:25) I just asked the following question: With respect to your stated concern over the ISO 3166-1 List in the .info TLD (among others), do your concerns extend to the names of cities, provinces/states, and even streets?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:27) http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/internet.html "The Internet and ISO 3166-1" only applies to list being used by ICANN to assign country codes. Unless I'm missing something, his suggestions exceed anything in ISO 3166-1.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:34) The two letter codes is one thing. Names are something else
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:36) Don't want to set precedent, but would set precedent re both process (or rather, bypassing process), and specific request.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:36) yes it would
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:37) As I recall, Twomey/Australia initiated WIPO II, is obviously not happy with the result.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:39) oh well
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:39) I'm pretty happy
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:39) about ... ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:39) the recommendation against expanding the reach of UDRP to include geographic indications
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:40) me too
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:40) I think such a move would have been a disgrace
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:41) it's bad enough as it is..
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:41) It says there is currently no legal standing to do so, and suggests that other paths be pursued. (as I recollect)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:41) but geography is even more complex and issue laden than trademark even!
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:41) Ditto Sot.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:45) alas I suspect the geographic indicator policing will simply be left up to the mini-icanns coming real soon now
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:46) Mini-Icanns?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:46) ?
<AvniyeTansug> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:46) We already have one in Turkey!
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:47) You mean the cc constitueny?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:47) cy
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:47) mini icann's, the first is .au: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=339&mode=nested&order=1
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:48) ah
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:48) cctlds
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:49) hi jo
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:50) hi
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:50) what did I miss
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:51) no, the cctld's aren't the mini icanns, listen to dengate thrush, and see this article: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=347&mode=nested&order=1
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:51) th Pindar Wong Show for one..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:52) now we're questioning the GAC rep
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:52) thanks
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:53) Pindar walked us through his vision of the furutre ALSO
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:53) seems like a done deal
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:55) ALM needs nine directors
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:55) ditto
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:55) or even 7
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:57) whatever half is
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 10:57) re ALM directors
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:00) The core of the problem is that the current board will make decisions and does not have the representation of the at-large in enough numbers to make a difference.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:00) hi judith. The key number is 2/3 of the Board, which is 13. If ALM only has 6, the bottom up can be permanently outvoted.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:00) we'll have whatever the powers want
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:01) joanna, that's the idea
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:01) and the five we do have will be outvoted in every case
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:01) The gTLD registry powerpoint presentation is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/gtld-registry.html and is linked off the agenda for this presentation
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:01) hi leah. correct.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:02) ditto
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:03) If we can move a resolution in the GA and submit for MdR, we might get 7?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:03) what?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:04) 7 ALM Directors, making permanent outvoting of AL Directors impossible by one vote...it's something
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:04) Joanna, what good is 7 if the board grows, say, to 25 members?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:04) Its the percentage of the board that is significant, not the number.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:04) Joanna, it needs to be half the board, whatever thenumber
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:04) There is no balance otherwise
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:05) 1/2 the Board
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:05) true Judith, so the resolution should be wordrd that way
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:05) Yes.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:05) I'm not sure half is winnable
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:05) 2/3 majority rule can be modified to 3/4 or 71%??
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) joanna, I think it has to be presented that way with perhaps a contigency for the other.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) Anything that would be functional is no doubt not winnable. That's the problem.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) Isn't the 2/3 majority vote linked to definition of consensus?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) withi the dnso
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) Joanna, only when the rules are followed. That's a big when.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) joanna, it can be changed at will, along with the bylaws
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:06) the Bylaws state 2/3rd for the Board
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:07) there have been how many changes to the bylaws since July?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:07) it's a joke
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:07) must be
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:07) The bylaws have changed 9 times in less than 2 years.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:08) delightful
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:08) I was told 9 since July, but have not verified.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:08) Unless there are half the board seats allocated to the AL, there is a constant chance that there will be a bias
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:08) a brief look yesterday revealed current version was last amended july 2000
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:09) The bylaws were revised nine times between 6-Nov-98 and 16-Jul-00. See http://www.domainhandbook.com/icann1.html#bylaws for details and links.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:09) true Leah, but the bottom line is that even one more than 6 (on current numbers) means a vote can be blocked
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:09) Also, much is decided by resolution with no *meaningful* input from the AL.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:10) So what percentage is 7 at the moment?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:11) joanna, great, so we set it up so that votes can be blocked but nothing advanced by the AL would be carried
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:11) Leah, we are not setting it up. We are fighting for concessions
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:11) call me stubborn, but I believe in parity
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:12) I agree leah, but I don't think it's realistic, but will still go for it
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) We need a board that is responsive to the AL and responsible/accountable to it.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) ditto
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) The ASO report is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/aso.html and is linked off the agenda from this presentation.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) Asking for one more is just a thought, we can argue it geographically
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) At This time, it is accountable to no one and nothing
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) Joanna, are you familiar with the archives at http://list.ifwp.org/?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:13) ono leah, sorry
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:14) correction...no Judith
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:14) There is a lot of history in those archives, Joanna
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:15) history is interesting, but has limited value with a Board that can claim circumstances change every 5 minutes
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:16) A participant noted, "[even] ICANN's articles are dead easy to modify... We covered all of this in the IFWP's twilight period. We earnestly proposed immutable articles, things of that sort. We were ignored. The ICANN board can do whatever it wishes."
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:17) public outcry is the only way to influence this process IMO
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:17) In this case, the history explains what we're up against today.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:18) Here we agree. Media. Media. Oh yea, and more media.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:18) ditto
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:18) Judith, I'll check them out
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:18) the media is just now even beginning to carry any information at all...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:18) in most cases they are biased
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:18) the article you sent is brilliant
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:20) It reflects the message that the mainstream media needs to carry to laypeople.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:20) The headline alone makes for a wonderful soundbite.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:21) ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:21) which article?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:21) yes, it does, but we have to find practical examples of how this will affect people. I haven't seen an article written on what is going to happen if things continue on this path
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:22) It should be posted on InternetStakeholders by kendall
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:22) Stuart Lynn's presentation on the new TLD process is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/tld-process.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeing
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:22) by kind permission of icbtoll..:-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:23) oh yes.. icb
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:23) Sotiris, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WORLD GOVT, I WANT A REVOLUTION FIRST.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:24) yes, I read it..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:24) I read the icb-toll free
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:24) oh ya, that is brilliant
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:24) i get it under the address socrates@greekphilosophy.com
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:24) Joanna, history repeats itself. We don't have to look far, or that far back, to see what happens with dictatorships etc.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:25) ditto
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:25) David Holtzman - ex CIT of NSI
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:25) CTO
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:26) where is the representation for the greater community?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:27) Judith - what do you think about comparing it to the Nazi party?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:27) or any other totalitarian government, joanna
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:27) a one party government
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:27) I used it in one piece and it drew a very strong reaction, so I dropped it
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:28) Particularly as relates to the slow but steady manipulative encroachment of power, I see lots of parallels.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:28) perhaps better to use a mythical one, animal farm, 1984, brave new world
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:28) Can we run a piece on those lines?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:28) good, Gary
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:29) (I'm first generation, my folks are refuges from Germany, came here in 1939 and 1941.)
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:29) Gary, "BIg Brother" is a little overused, don't you think?
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:29) The Evil Empire in Star Wars
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:29) Leah, can you send Joanna your URL for CyberHQ?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:29) joanna, people are familiar with Big Brother, though
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:29) well, they're becoming less mythical, we're watching icann build it
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:30) my grandfather was in the trenches in the 1st WW, both my parents were in the Navy in the 2ndWW
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:30) Judith, it's linked from tldlobby.com I think
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:30) joanna, my father was killed in WWII
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:30) we certainly are gary
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:30) sorry to hear that leah, where?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:30) Mu grandfather "served the kaiser", couldn't believe Hitler would take his rights and business and then try to kill him. (Only my immediate family survived.)
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:31) Ahh, IATA.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:31) Pacific. Uncle is totally diabled - Italy
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:31) Most of my family was lost in WWII
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:31) well, I don't see ICANN mobilizing an army and genocide
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:31) ghettos and camps
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) although by the time i finished it might cross their mind...lol
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) not genocide, certainly, but eliminate an entire class of users from decision making...
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) I'm telling you, The Evil Empire from Star Wars. The Emperor, Darth Vadar.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) Joanna, different terrain, but still a turf war.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) hi Tom!!!!!
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) We need "the force"
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) Hi, Jo!
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) indeed, Leah.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) joanna, this is just the machinery being built, In the wrong hands if it had existed in hitler's time, he would have won
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) The ragtag rebels, seeking liberty.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:32) "fight for right"
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) All these analogies are useful, right?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) a long time ago in a namespace far far away...
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) Precisely.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) : )
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) excellent point Gary, but not in 5 minutes
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) Though, not so long ago.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) joanna, it boils down to grass roots which can, if done well, have tremendous influence
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) can I be Yoda?
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) Hey, and we have a Princess Leah.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:33) use the farce Vint
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) : )
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) .yoda is up for sale
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) ;-)
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) Jedi mind trick :)
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) leah, if I didn't agree with you, I wouldn't be here
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) Han Solo is NOT Hans Kraiijenbrink (Sorry, Hans)
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:34) Tom, we should meet?
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) sounds like a plan.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) Joanna: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=558, CyberHQ - THE NEW IMPERIALISM
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) I mean you are only half a mile away right?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) Vint (in raspy voice) internet, I am your father.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) Internet: Nooooo
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) no longer. I moved to Queens.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) Joanna, where are you located?
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) (ack)
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) Tom, send me an email with your phone
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) sure thing.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) ok
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) : )
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:35) Judith, I am in new York, on long Island
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:36) I'm in Manhattan, east 20's.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:36) I was going to go into Manhattan today. I'm sitting here like a lazy fool instead.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:37) Judith, we should meet
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:37) merrick
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:37) Yes.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:37) email me your email address: mailto:joppenheimer
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:37) I have ideas, and I'm sure you do also
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:38) mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:38) I want to send you this article. (you can read html in your email?)
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:38) I find it amusing that IATA is complaining about an alternate root carrying .travel since .travel has been there for many years
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:38) Did he say ICANN does things right?!
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:38) Did Lynn just say ICANN does things slowly but RIGHT?!!!
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) yes
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) ha
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) The man is incredible.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) That's his job.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) yes, html is fine.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) He lives in a dream world
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) Damned fool.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) Yes, he is.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:39) black is white up is down the big lie
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) the bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) incredible.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) dot this, dot that.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) dot.dot.dot.etc
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) Exactly sot. i don't see lynn as a fool at all, he was hired for his spin ability
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) It's getting to the point where I think we should be organizing a formal grass roots organization outside of ICANN
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:40) thee will be no .health in the near future
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) agreed.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) joanna, you're the organizer, so let's organize
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) is there an icann-ish wiki yet?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) count me in
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) we've been trying to do that for a very long time
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) what's a wiki?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:41) it's a live editable web page
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:42) i volunteer the domain worldatlarge.org
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:42) collaborative effort at defining terms etc.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:42) Leah, maybe we can collect URL's of the efforts we're aware of ...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:42) this speaker just raised the issue of ccTLDs marketing as generics
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:42) dunno why they're worried about these cctlds. .md went bankrupt
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) yes, judith
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) .co
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) thanks, we also have internetstakeholders
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) ccTLDs should market any way they like with autonomy to do so.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) urgen, now what on earth can we do with an edible webpage?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) it's competition. nothing wrong with that
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:43) it allows an interesting development of consensus among people that you trust
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:44) lol. I said, "Edible"
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:44) current RDF movement is using it
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:44) Joanna, did you send me your email address?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:44) search wiki on sourceforge
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:44) when the mainstream media publish an article, say bbc.co.uk/ science and technology, they always try to publish URL for opposing position. At the moment, Icannwatch is the only one
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:45) This is the board member who said he did not see a need for an AL
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:45) (Melbourne)
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:45) not yet Judith, I'm not on that machine - give me 5 minutes
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:45) I was thinking more like 60 Minutes.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:45) Interesting about this public forum, the people who can afford to come down and speak are also saying icann is too slow. no-one likes them
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:45) jo-uk@rcn.com
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:48) Joanna, check your email.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:49) Kleinsin gets around (was just in Geneva at ITU meeting ), is lobbying hard to get/keep ENUM under IAB control.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:51) Joanna, the article is from October 1999.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:52) good question
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:53) You dont have to use the system. You can just not have a system.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:53) Anyone know anything about this Internet Driver thing? sounds like some other faux altroot
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:53) so they introduce domains that will not be used...
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:54) yeah right!
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:55) listen to this one...
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:55) yep
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:56) What's hard to figure out. Fraudulant registrations should be deleted.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:56) I've written about the asillyass thing here: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=352&mode=nested&order=1
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) If there is even a question, the registration should be deleted
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) Are 'real time' comments getting through this time around?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) itoo
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) Joanna, I've send a second article.
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) The meeting is adjourned until 2pm for a lunch break.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) ditto
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) well, what do you mean by "a question"?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) fraudulent.com is not available
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) Be first in line to get fraudulent.com - Back Order it NOW!
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:57) k, we have an hour. I'll be back then
<baptista_2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) c/quit
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) fraudulent.info?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) they completely stonewalled the afilias fiasco. stuart, do you have a comment... silence
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) heh
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) hehe
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) they are playing Enya. lol
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) see y'all in an hour.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) see ya in a bit folks
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) bbl
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) Lets propose the .fraud TLD for use of fraudulant domains...
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 11:58) bbl
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:00) 9am pacific
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:01) newsburst: ICANN sued by RIAA...
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) tries to think of a good comment to make re 'domain holders only' membership policy...
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) good pro or against?
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) urgen, I think we're all sleeping now.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) Or eating.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) I know...
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) lol
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) just filler
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) heh
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) Has anyone proposed any alternative methods?
<Joe_Alagna> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:02) take care guys
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:03) I understand ICANN wanting to ensure that one person per vote
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:03) And why the current system cant ensure that.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:03) bbl. I'm gonna sit in the room here, but go make myself some lunch. : )
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:03) internet and names impacts a greater population than domain owners
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:04) would that be the one that signs the check or the one that understands the question?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:04) :-)
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:04) But has ICANN considered any alternative methods. Such as votes being delegated out to individual ISPs who alow their customers to have the option of voting.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:05) I don't think they are capable of that level of sophistication yet
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:06) Is the video camera on? I'm getting audio, but black video screen
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:07) black screen here too
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:07) k tks
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:07) bbl
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:07) And can ICANN ensure that domain name registrations are not taken up in bulk by lobying groups in a similar way? As ICANN have stated, the cost of such an excersise would not be outside of the grasp of a dedicated group.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:08) membership in what?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:08) at large.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:08) I registered in GA but wasn't asked if I had a domain name
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:09) Current paper being distributed is proposing that domain name ownership be a requisit. And that paper is set to become policy if not contested.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:09) :-)
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:09) tld or just regular name?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:10) what about dyndns and groups like that where you can get names for free?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:10) I think they mean ownership of a second level domain.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:10) ok
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:10) someone should open up a tld to free second level then :-)
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:11) bound to be some small island with no net wanting to do a good service
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:11) I think the question is a good foot in the door
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:12) I know it crossed my mind before
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:12) but I had to discard it as unfair
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:12) the definition of the community needs to be re-addressed
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:15) pic back up
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:16) time to make a pot of coffee
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:21) hehs at the Comment form...
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:21) Meeting is Curently Discussin - Lunch Break
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:23) if someone here followed the first part... the At Large discussion... I would like to hear comments :-)
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:24) They havent much moved from the questions they were asking at the last meeting.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:25) They have noticed however, that people might find it a bit odd that they can change the board bylaws.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:29) :-) hi localtest
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:32) so, since I think I am probably closed out unless membership uses the domain name rule, even though it's not fair, it is less unfair than what stands now so I'd be in favor of it.... being a domain name holder.
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:34) in the end, I also came to the conclusion that it would not be a bad way... but I think that if you have other authentication systems you should accept them. So this morning I picked up the mike
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:34) just to say that they should at least accept those who already were authenticated for the past election.
<root> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:35) actually the elections were full of ballot stuffing efforts
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:35) I could see that
<root> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:35) example - ICANN declined to provide me with a membership under the name Joe Baptista - they said they could not verify my identity
<root> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:36) so I registered under the name of several ficticious women and got 10 addtional votes
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:36) :-)))
<root> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:36) I know for a fact that in Canada and the USA a number of "friends of mine" registered hundreds of dead people who got a vote
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:36) this is true... but the domain registration process does not have any better identification procedure...
<root> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:37) exactly
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:37) so either you set up something serious, i.e. requiring proofs of ID etc, or then you accept the fact that there will be this behaviour -
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:37) and they want to introduce a fee to make it more difficult (which will allow only rich entities to capture the election, anyway...)
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:37) easiest way to fix it is to establish a simple control mechanisim
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:38) posts a question that he thinks a lot of people would like answered...
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:38) affidavits sworn before a notary public or judge would do it
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:38) now they are delegating identity verification to local registries... which are among those most interested to cheat :-)
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:38) of course icanns goal with the at large has nothing to do with verification of identity
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:39) and everything to do with cheating the public at large
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:39) necessary evil?
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:40) this is almost clear... but I'd however try to get as much as possible and go with it, so to start an ALSO and gain some weight and visibility
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:40) in the long run it's good for us - the more icann swings the less people like them
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:40) if we go on fighting for other four years... we'll never get anything.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:41) well the alt roots are growing at an incredible rate - and now account for over 100 million users - estimated - china has left - new.net is another force
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:41) so i would say icann is becoming irrelevant
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:41) at least thats what we plan to tell our 1,500 users
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:41) I feel that way too
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:42) but there are still quite a few other dynamics in play too
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:42) like what?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:42) like icann really is just a puppet of US commerce
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:42) if you think that here new.net is even sponsoring the lunches... :-)
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:42) are they sponsoring the lunches?
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:43) yes, they do - well, some sandwiches and not more than that, but...
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:43) have you looked at http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/21553.html
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:44) thanks
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:44) I like these meetings for the URLs they produce :-)
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:44) well Andy Duff is being very two faced
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:44) yes, saw it - and he says he offered the lunch :-)
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:45) hopes his 'outreach' question gets asked. The Register love it when someone mentions them...
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:47) did anyone see the reuters url: http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=internetnews&StoryID=206015
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:47) (I was in that room at that moment :-) )
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:48) Roger has a good question, but its not likely to get asked, as they can claim they cant answer questions on pending lawsuits. (which is technicaly true)
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:49) Then perhaps it can be resubmitted without the legal stuff.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:50) would, but already has a question on a similar topic.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:50) However, is ICANN the party being sued? Or is it NeuLevel and Afilias?
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:51) If it is not ICANN, I imagine they can comment.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:53) Its a sticky legal point. As even if they arnt, they could still be called as witness or such.
<TomOcc> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:53) bbl
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:53) I keep hearing this garbage in the press about a conference line ICANN has established for people to participate - well - where is this conference line info posted?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:53) anyone know?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:54) You got the info if you pre-registered I hear.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:54) Which is odd, because only people who would be there in person pre-registered.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:54) Ben are you there?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:54) he'd know
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) he always has cool URLs to toss up
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) they off to lunch, so to speak?
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) Did I miss anything good?
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) There was a conf call line in the ALSC room, with no one there... I don't know where they posted it - maybe on the ALSC forum.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) still on lunch
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) thanks.
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) yes, lunch ends in 10 minutes, and btw I'd better have something to eat before getting back in the room.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:55) exactly - more icann bullshit - they publish a line for people like us to use and then don't advertise it except to the people present at the meetings - more ICANN SHIT as one of their at large directors stated
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:56) for my curiosity... how many at large members or activists here? people who mainly participate as individuals, I mean
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:56) Hans, if that is really you, I must ask you to step down from the Board. Enough board-squatting.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:56) its a different hans I think
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:56) Since you seem to moralized quite a bit, it would be nice if you lived with some standards yourself.
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:56) andy... he likes to talk like that (I like to respect others even when I don't agree ;-) )
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:57) are you talking to me about standards?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:57) stop flashing ads and put us up on the big screen :-)
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:57) well, yesterday Mr. Kraaijenbrink entered the room in which the NAIS report was being shown and told something like "there is no public interest in ICANN"...
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:57) Are they ignoring the people in this room again?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) vint read an email post
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) I was shocked
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) We're they're dog and pony show
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) their.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) ack. sorry.
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) Well thats a good sign.
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:58) Did anything come of it?
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:59) I need coffee if I am going to sit through this.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:59) it was a great question
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:59) has posted a comment on this. Summed up its 'there is public intrest in ICANN. But its not *Nice* public intrest'
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:59) scrolls scribe back
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 12:59) Which is, I think, why they claim there is no public intrest.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:00) Put us up on the big screen,Ben. Give the bored people there something to watch and giggle about
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:00) nope don't see it, maybe that happened before I turned scribe on
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:00) So how long will ICANN continue like this before it is dismantled for something else?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) Yay, Icann is engaged.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) it won't be dismanted,,
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) we would just get other icanns
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) well, I'm getting off the LAN and back in the room. I personally think that at least we have to try put an ALSO together... and in Europe,
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) vigilate on .eu as it could become an European ICANN :-)
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) and then they would have to really work
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) (and maybe it will be betteR)
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) Itis not fair, not effective, not concerned with the Internet users. It is concerned with the IP constituency, mega-corporations and general cronyism.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) Crossed Line!
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:01) Directors are beginning to filter back into the room -- starting shortly, I imagine.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:02) yep.
<VittorioBertola> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:02) yep, I have to go. goodbye to everyone.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:02) Note to organisers. Check that the Mic is live, and that your not patched into a webcast.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:04) here we go...
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:04) So, is anyone there?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:05) They're mixing up agenda items again!
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:05) Too bad if you were timing things around their listed agenda
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:05) The meeting has resumed and is moving ahead to the sponsored TLD report.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:05) heh
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:06) Lots of grey haired white people on the stage right now. Funny that.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:06) It'll be 3 years before we see another application process.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:07) Big colour balance difference between the cameras!
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:08) I WANT CHICKEN.COOP!
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:08) .aero, .coop. . . . what were they smoking?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:08) buk buk buk
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:09) when we get to IPv6 and there are enough IPs for tld to be roots...
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:09) It was as if they said, "Let's get a bunch of useless TLDs out there so that Afilias and Verisign will not experience attrition of dollars.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:09) No. Multiple roots bad. m'kay.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:09) lol
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:10) I think you are right Roger.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:10) Dont do Multiple Roots. m'kay.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:10) the first change you'll see if public vs private routing space
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:10) if = is
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:11) multiple private routing will be the same as multiple root
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:11) public can still have a single root
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:11) Chosen applicants that don't demonstrate they have what it takes, should be nixed.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:11) And ICANN should reconsider other applicants from last year.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:12) they wont
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:12) I know. They want to soak applicants for another 50K. Inflation will see that increase.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:12) ..... scribe .....
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:13) ICANN - "Hey, these guys arnt sticking to the agreement and proposals they gave us!", AtLarge - "Woah, Deja Vu."
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:14) How is .aero going to get 10,000 2LD's under it?
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:14) it wont.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:14) it was a bad business choice.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:14) Hah! Vint is acting like the Board hasn't already decided what's happening here.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:14) I just got back, what did Louis say?
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:15) he was having sex with kent crispin
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:15) When ICANN thought it was being effective when analyzing business models and the general market, it missed the point that only 500 .aeros will ever be regged.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:15) What's the latest onthe GA election?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:15) Put quotes arounf election, BTW
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:15) The meeting has returned to its regular schedule with the DNSO Names Council Report.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) Where's Esther Dyson when you need her?!
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) thanks, scribe back
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) Polyester?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) 500 .aeros ... that's a classic ...
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) 500 SLDs = slow start and no land rush
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) 200?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) Is that the moto of ICANN now then. ' Will take their comments later.'
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:16) THat's a wothwhile TLD NOT
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:17) A whole TLD for 500 2LD's. THAT'S efficient use of the root.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:17) .arpa
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:17) two slds
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:18) .arpa, the IAB's hope for controlling ENUM.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:19) if the itu will let them - not
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:19) Paul Kane's presentation on Whois is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/whois-pf.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:20) thanks
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:20) Vint Cerf - founder of the Internet - Destroyer of the Internet
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:20) Cerf is not the worst of the ICANN board.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:20) Staff runs the show.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:20) But he's part of the problem
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:20) That title belongs to Hans
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) Thnx
<root> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) yes he is the worst - he's in charge and therefore the head honcho in charge of this garbage called icann
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) true that
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) no problem, Hans.
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) He could stop this though and yet he does nothing.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) Stuart Lynn is a major problem.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:21) why is Hans worse than Cerf?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:22) He's a fascist
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:22) He is a revisionist of history, he doesn't support competition and fairness in Namespace.
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:23) You'r clearly misinformed
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:23) That's one of your favourite quotes
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:23) Or accurate observers...
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:23) terrestrial irrelevance..
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:24) look to windward
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:24) It's a shame Milton had to leave yesterday
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:24) Hans, I am not misinformed. I have watched and heard you speak.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:24) My information comes right from you.
<TraciLombardo> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:25) I wonder if they have all my money spent yet.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:25) wtf does "look to windward" mean?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:25) Hans - if this is the director - your two faced - we all know it so there's little chance of appeal here
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:25) But I don't care to pick a fight with you, if it is indeed you. You're not worth my time.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:25) Consider Phealbus, who was aliken you.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:26) If you are indeed Hans, nxt time you have the mic, start by coughing and then apologise. THen we'll know this is you
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:26) it is me, you'r probably right. but stop calling names.:(
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:26) it'
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:26) We have no power. You have all the power. We don't have much option other than name calling
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:26) it's not calling names - it's called stating the facts
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:26) Or revolution
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) ICANN's core business page:
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) http://www.icann.org/financials/credit.htm
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) name calling is the last refuge of the disenfranchised. But we're not quite that far squiggles.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) We must be close, though
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) So please play nice.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) Almost time for a Battle in Seattle
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:27) revolution or multiple roots?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:28) I tried playing nice, many meetings ago. I got ignored.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:28) Calling names will get you ignored more.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:28) Not when the guns come out
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:28) Lynn doesn't know process of draft report to final decision. How surprising.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:29) didn't he ask Mike?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:29) Is it any wonder his draft paper morphed into policy.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:30) They must have to prep him big time before allowing him to speak to the press.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:30) THey stuck a brain implant in him.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:30) Someone types stuff into a terminal, and it blurts out of his mouth
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:31) lol
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:31) lots of typos
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:32) hans - when does your term expire?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:32) so now that we are all here - what is that conference call telephone number setup by icann?????
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:32) It doesn't. He's a perpetual ring-in
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:32) 2075
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:33) an illegal board member?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:33) hi sotiris
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:33) hi all
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:33) exlax-whoever oyu are, term expires end of annual meeting 2002
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:33) It expires when they uncover the numbered bank accounts with big donations from Verisign and other corporations
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:33) thank you hans. make sure you close the door on your way out
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:34) will do ;)
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:34) HansKraaijenbrink what is the telephone number for this conceference call setup by ICANN???
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:34) you should ask ben
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:34) ah yes, Hans?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:35) Hans or ben?
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:35) not me
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:35) Is someone going to ask Gomes why he refered to original registrant as "rightful owner" yesterday?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:35) what conf call set-up?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:36) The one that was set up, but not advertised.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:36) whichever
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:36) Name the Registrars!
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) Of course, this probalem wouldnt have happened with Multiple Roots.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) hehe
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) or more than one registry
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) Joe, we used conference call to make presentations yesterday
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) nothing to do with the root
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) this is the srs - seperate system
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:37) I think some members of NC also contributed that way
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:38) Still a Single Point of Failure asosiated with the single root.
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:38) The single point of failure isn't technical. Is competitive.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:38) hey Joop!
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:38) Still being completely ignored by the powerful, Joop?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:38) How's it going?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:38) ah, good that you're here Joanna
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) there's a few of us here now...
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) Joann, did you get my emails?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) not completely ignored, but met with non-committal answers :-(
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) Access to root = competitive.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) remember folks - the 13 roots were setup when the internet only had some 100 of thousands of domains and not many more users then 5 million
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) same game, then.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) Hi Sotiris
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) not even that many
<Sergio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) baptista... 9 of 'em of US.. not that fair :)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:39) Joop, I corrected that scrutineer thing.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) yes, Judith, thank you. Very interesting,
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) Ah, good. I really think yo would be the best Chair to stop this third hijack attempto
<Sergio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) And waht about the Committee at ICANN studying the root? they live apart.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) so joannalane - what is the conference number
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) i agree - 9 us roots is even dangerous
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) I will try, but my time has been limited of late - but i will try to bring oder about
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:40) Joann, I sent them for concept purposes, not necessarily for new publication.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) order
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) Joe, it's different depending on your location. Mine was a 1-888 number in the US
<Sergio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) and the contracts are going to be made between ICANN and the 13 operators
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) i estimate that with the current internet population stats and the number of nameservers currently online - we need at least 60 roots
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) They then patch you through
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) order, or the rule of Law. :-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) Logos
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) ok give me the 1-888 number - i have US long line access to toll
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) 13 x 13 no problem
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:41) Dike
<joopteernstra> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:42) nay (meanin Yes in greek:-)
<Sergio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:42) 13 np now. but 9 US and ICANN contracted is a problem I think
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:42) ;-o
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:42) if every dns server secondaried the root zone it wouldn't be an issue
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:42) has anyone here ever considered the fact that a root can be used to redirect and intercept traffic seamlessly
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:43) Vortex Baby!
<Sergio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:43) baptista ...there's ECHELON for that (again USA:)))
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:43) Someone comment on this then in the real time comments ?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:43) Judith, I understand...wouldn't republish anything without your permission
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:43) Or should I?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:44) thats it - did it myself once and it was scary - i intercepted alot of orsc root traffic on port 80 - got passwords - credit card numbers - etc etc
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:44) ??? why 80. You should only see 53
<Sergio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:44) but the committee at ICANN is exactly studying this kind of probelm I think: security.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:45) which registry was it that took the hit with the 'squatter' going bankrupt?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:45) so what is that 1-888 number joannalane?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:45) i redirected traffic on port 80 to one page - i'll get you the address
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:45) This guy just suggested a lottery - must not know about the lottery lawsuit.
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:45) it was the .nl registry
<StephenSturgeon> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:45) Gary, I understood that it was a cybersquatter that went bankrupt
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:46) because you *. the root zone to one IP. Got it.
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:46) what the hell is random come first serve?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:46) Joe, I'm just trying to remeber who is in charge of it
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:46) A cybersquatter wouldn' have 60,000 names. a SPECUlator might though
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:46) yes exlax - exactly right - here is what some 80,000 people saw that days when they surfed anywhere p
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:46) http://www.dot-god.com/communications/Diebold_Inc/
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:47) ok thanks joannalane
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:47) who's talking now?
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:48) gotta go - joe, you're a nut case but we love you
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:48) this by the way EXLAX was the zone file I used http://www.dot-god.com/communications/Diebold_Inc/baptista-vortex-namespace.txt
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:48) judith - for justice
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:48) thx
<ExLax> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:48) bye all
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:49) What was he talking about - for justice?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:49) beats me
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:49) thx. hans.
<FidelRJ> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:49) I don't know..
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) they're talking about pre-regging other people's names~
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) That brings up the posability of domain name vulchers.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) this next served idea would suggest that you can't "own" names as trademarks
<SotirisSotiropoulos1> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) oh es
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) Hovering waiting for you to lapse just once, then snaping the name up...
<SotirisSotiropoulos1> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) yes
<FidelRJ> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) that's not going to work..defintely...
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:50) SNAP - how appropriate
<FidelRJ> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:51) pre-reg should not be option, unless it is examined throughout an international standard
<FidelRJ> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:51) what would be the criteria then ??
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:52) Go ccTLD's!!!
<FidelRJ> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:53) the interactivity of ccTLDs is a very important issue...
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:54) the ccTLD's are the spanner in ICANN's power grab cogs
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:55) Is there a URL for this presentation?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:56) Love the language in this. Not a mention of forming a report commitie into deciding if there will be... THERE SHALL BE.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:57) Joe, Diane Schroder is charge of conference call facilities
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:57) Is there a URL for Gomes' SRS Resources presentation?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 13:58) see what i mean - this number has not been called simply because no one knows what it is.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:00) Joe, it's not a public comment phone number.Milton could have used it, for example, for presenting .ORG TF report
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:00) Chuck Gomes did not give a powerpoint presentation in today's meeting. Please look to the scribe's notes and the video to see what he said.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:00) so why are they telling the press that it's for public participation
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:00) The ccTLD communique is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/cctld-communique.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:00) WHere can we find a list of the options than the Registrars constituency came up with?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:01) Damn, the one technical job ICANN is supposed to do, it sucks at. Who hired these guys?
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:01) The ccTLD managers statement is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/cctld-managers.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:01) really? Who is?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:02) according to reuter - and I wuote
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:02) i mean i quote
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:02) ICANN had set up a conference-call line so those not in
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:02) Montevideo could participate, but an operator reported that
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:02) no one had dialed in.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:02) ... basically more icann jibbersih and lies
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:03) Joanna, some serious media intervention is needed ...
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:03) I imagine it's listen only.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:04) yes, Judith, that's why I shot myself in the foot yesterday
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:04) huh?
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:04) you mean your presentation?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:04) well, it's wasn't exactly the way to garner vote
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:04) yes
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:05) how's the GA voting going?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:05) what GA voting?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:06) sorry NC voting for GA board member
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:06) Joanna, from what I see/read so far you are credibility personafied. Within ICANN you can accomplish nothing. You are made for bigger and better things,
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:06) thxs!
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:07) Email me your phone number, let's see if we can talk some time this week.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:09) Ha. Vint sets it up for a delay
<Judith_Oppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:10) Yes.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:11) Watch them delay a dicision on the CCSO for 6 months
<StephenSturgeon> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:11) Hi Rebecca - we met during the internet law program at Harvard in July - you are all doing a great job with the technicalities of the webcast !
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:11) So we can asume come december, the ccTLDs will withdraw.
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:15) subject based.. read semantic
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:15) squiggles, the staff have been trading SOs for votes
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:15) read semanticweb.org and rdf efforts
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:16) they should review those efforts to establish a sensible heirarchy
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:16) Car keys in a pile on the floor?
<urgen> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:17) we are trying to turn domain names into usenet newsgroups?
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:17) is that sallen from tucows?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:18) don't think so. He's speaking in Spanish
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:19) thanks squiggles
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:20) icann is iana. but comment is interesting.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:22) ICANN is stalling service to ccTLDs over policy issues.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:24) good answer from Peter
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:24) yup
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:26) he's right, it has not been suffiently articlulated
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:26) Its been said before, just ignored.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:29) then add three seats for the ccSO and make the split afterwards
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:29) half of whatever is still half.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:30) or divide the current number of seats among 4 so's instead of 3
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:30) Oh, looks like my question isnt going to get asked. Didnt think it would.
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:33) Dan Halloran's presentation on Registration Transfer Rules is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/transfers.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:33) Ben, url is no good.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:33) Rebecca has the right one.
<JohnPalfrey2> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:34) Thanks -- all set in scribe's notes.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:36) bankruptsy? why?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:37) This is odd. I find nothing to disagree with in this proposal.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:38) Its nice to know somethings working here.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:40) I don't get the bankruptsy thing either
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:40) It migth constitute passing off of assets.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:41) there are several things in that agreement that need looking at. I started a dialogue about it with Ross Rader
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:41) The bankrupcy thing is a nonsense
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:42) like there is ever going to be consensus between the registrars on the transfer policy
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:42) There is no reason for it
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:42) icann needs to act
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:42) and define the language
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:42) Mike Palage's registrar transfer presentatin is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/transfers2.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:42) There is, a Domain Name constitutes a held asset.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:43) So it likely has to be considered in audits asosiated with bankruptcy hearings.
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:43) 3 things needed, leaving current policy in place, add the following 1. Default ACK mandatory, 2.
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:44) 2. Mandatory removal from zone file upon exipiry (Registry Controlled)
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:44) This will be dependandt on local legislation, but ICANN has to consider how the various countries and regions will consider things as assets.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:45) Leah,
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:45) 3. Mandatory deletion of domain name after some grace period, i.e., 40 days for example(also Registry controlled) -- these three things addecd to the language, solves the problem.
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:45) the losing registrar has 5 days to ask the gaining registrar for proof of adequate authorization having been obtained from the admin contact of the domain...this is already in the policy
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:46) Leah. I just sent you email about this topic
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:48) The GA needs to get into this..Joop, there are issues here for individuals
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:50) Go Nigel!
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:52) Ha! Good question Nigel!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:53) Then ICANN isn't equipped to do the job.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:53) bingo
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:53) they need specific language in the contract to not permit any monkey business
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:54) With ccTLD's is won't. With domain name registrants it can't. What can ICANN do?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:54) (it won't)
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:54) encourage them? How about MAKING THEM
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) Someone tell Lynn there isn't a registrants constituency.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) in other words, they do not admit responsibility for any form of enforcement of the agreements they make
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) yes Mr Cert, it is a policy issue, that is: it is a contractual issue.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) correct, joanna
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) Yup. No responsibility for engforcement of UDRP rules, for starters
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) Cerf: its not a policy problem, its an enforcement problem.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:55) when providers step out of line
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:56) judith, partially correct, but they need more specific language. Touton went as far as he could given the current langauge of the Appendix to the contract dealing with transfers
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:57) Eric, you just heard that ICANN doesn't do enforcement on behalf of registrants (unless they're tm holders re the UDRP).
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:57) The only contract the registrant has lays on it only obligations, not rights.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:57) talk about irresonsibility. They set policy but do nothing whatever to enforce it
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:57) they just have to set minimum standards for regsitrant authorization of the transfers by the gaining registrar
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) *enforcement*, Eric, enforcement.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) but they won't enforce those standards
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) that's easy. give me the authority to tell you what you can do and let you run amok
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) ineffectual, irresponsible
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) here comes the damage control
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) Judith: The problem in the current Registrar Agreement with ICANN, is that there simply is not specific enough language to enforce with registrars
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) protect the money source
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:58) not up to the job. obviously.
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:59) for instance: consider my next comment:
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:59) Eric, that's registrar to registrar, not registrant to registrar.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:59) Get it?
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:59) because you had shit service
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 14:59) Judith you lost me. ICANN can enforce contracts with Registrars
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:00) Eric,
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:00) But it doesn't pursue enforcement when the complaint comes from a registrant.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:00) here comes the bullshit from Roger
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:00) the problem is that there needs to be more specific language in the contract to force registrars to play fairly in the sandbox
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:00) left because of service and price
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:00) It seems to be "enforcing" agreements by referring it to the constituency
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:01) isn't there something bigger than a "bull" that you could describe this by?
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:01) hehe
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:01) elephant shit?
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:01) that's getting closer :-)
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:01) I agree about the language problem, but even when that is tightened up, there is no way to anforce
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:01) Let's hope Ros from Tucows get some Mic Time after this
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:02) right on
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:02) The issue here is registrant rights. But there is no one to represent it.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:02) many of those who had not made any decision did not register the names themselves. They had their provider do it when it was internic/NSI...
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:02) exactly
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:02) when the providers changed the registrar they were using they changed all such registrations
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:02) Ross did consult some registrants before drafting this
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) Roger doing his pull-the-wool-over-their-eyes trick
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) He posted a copy to the GA and asked for feedback, it was largely ignored
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) registrants did not want to bother with it
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) did roger practise in front of the mirror before today?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) The Registrar's have invited comment from individuals in the GA
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) there was a time when only the provider would do the registration for the customer
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:03) Your customers were ISP's who made the change decision on behalf of THEIR clients
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:04) You're FULL OF SHIT Roger
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:04) agree with Warren - the issue of the dual role of Verisign needs to be re-visited
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:04) the NSI procedure was so confusing that most registrants could not understand it
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) I remember that Leah, then the provider was bought out and now Registrants can't get their names transferred
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) wank wank wank
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) go Ross
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) Yes. GO ROSS
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) has anyone been noticing a substantial increase in scans across ports 21,80, etc originating from taiwan.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) with NSI, the tech contact could make the transfer
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:05) sorry wrong conference
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:06) Wrong silly hat, Joe
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:06) happens - i always have mutiple windows open.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:07) Just don't do it again, or we'll send Esther around to spank you
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:07) just don't send comments to the scribe Joe, you're not likely to get a response
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:07) really dena's been getting that too. started yesturday.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:08) anyway, versign's empirical data is flawed because of the fact that much of the "I didn't know" comes from the ISPs making the change to a new registrar
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:08) ok that's different. surprisingly these ports scans started on the icann meeting day - i'm sure it's coincidence.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:09) and the registrants did not know and in many cases could care less
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:09) ya joannalane - i have that window open too.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:09) they just want their names to resolve
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:09) I just came back. Who is this guy?
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:09) ross rader from Tucows
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:10) Leah - don't care until they get an invoice for services they didn't order
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:10) Ahh, yes, I remember the voice. He is the one who threw down the gauntlet and said Tuscows is after .web in the next round.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:10) a moomoo friend - ross is a really good guy - he even owns several domains in .GOD - example.god and some other nonsensical stuff
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:10) He gives me gas.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:10) I sumitted a question. Let's see if its read.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:11) Ross listens to registrants - I agree - he's one of the good guys
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:11) Ross is one of the few people thee hat actually care about Registrants
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:11) he's a good guy Roger - he been considering setting up his own roots - the moomoo root - tucows has even experimented with the .moo tld
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:11) I submitted question also judith - they must take one
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:11) I didn't much like his tone or the "threat" he leveled. Of course, not all would view it AS a threat. I do.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:12) .moo lol
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:12) I heard of it.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:12) I like Fockler.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:12) but ross of course would deny he's considering a moo root. they would be serious competition for icann
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:12) Seems to be a genuinely nice, fair man.
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:12) you just heard Verisign say they wouldn't play ball
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:13) why doesn't he name names?
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:13) Good ol' Stu
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:13) They've TRIED to work it out
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:13) check it out RogerKeating http://moo.tucows.com/
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:13) thanks, Joe.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:14) ICANN rules by contract. The issue here is a registrant rights issue. With ICANN unprepared to enforce registrant rights, why doesn't ICANN strengthen the registrant contracts with registrars, to provide for enforceability by the registrants themselves?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:14) the TLD .moo - of course he won;t list it live in the alts - he's a bit wimpy - but i love him - maybe wimpy translates to business wise
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:15) and he does care about his people - i.e. domain owners and registrant operators - or resellers. i'm very proud of tucows and it's efforts
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:15) good question Judith
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:15) Yes, but Vint didn't ask it.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:16) bravo
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:16) Judith: They need to strengthen the ICANN Registrar Agreement, specifically the appendix on policy on Registrar transfers to specifically prevent monkey business, and stop more elephant shit from descending upon us
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:17) elephany shit - i'm writing this down in my book of entertain phrases i've seen
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:17) Eric, who do you work for, if you don't mind my asking?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:18) hi gary - welcome back
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:18) We are a Tucows RSP, and we are also a Certified CIRA Registrar. I am the owner of the company
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:18) The meeting is now returning to a discussion of Sponsored TLD Agreements and .pro.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:18) Eric, when you service a registrant, it is the registrant's domain name, not your's.
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:19) Judith: of course it is the registrant's domain name
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:19) Perhaps "gaining registrar" is a misnomer. The domain registrant remains the registrant throughout. It is their rights that are being infringed on.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:19) Perhaps it is time for ISPs/other providers to let their clients know when they are changing their providers
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:19) Judith: "gaining Registrar" is just term to describe the registrar that the registrant is transferring to
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:20) Although if I contract with an ISP to register a domain, I fully expect him to handle it
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:20) hey joe, fsck windoze
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:21) Leah: good point. Generally I think that the ISP pays for the domain name renewal or registration and bills the customer whatever they (the ISP) charges the end user of the domain name, so it might be irrelavent whether or not the ISP notifies the registrant as to what Registrar the ISP is using
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:21) I'm fully aware, we have losing and gaining RespOrgs in 800 too. But in the case of a problem with the losing RespOrg, the 800 subscriber has rights to pursue, doesn't have to rely on the gaining RespOrg (in fact the gaining RespOrg doesn't have the rights at all, the subscriber does.)
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:21) Erick, it is no longer irrelevant.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:22) If the registrant (your customer for ISP services, for instance) leaves you, he needs to know where to go and have his UID/Password in order to make DNS changes
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:22) if he so chooses and he should be able to choose
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:23) unless the proivder is also the registrant and allows only use of the dn, the registrant should have final control
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:24) Leah, you're right. In 800 a RespOrg reseller has to get sign-off from subscriber to port his number to another RespOrg.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:24) The ISP/other provider is only the tech contact
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:24) Eric, do you see how the model works?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:24) if he is providing addtional services - e.g. perform registration services, the registrant still should know what is happening
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:25) at one time it did not matter. now it does
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:25) No additional comments?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:25) the provider can, in terms of service, make it mandatory that they are the tech contact, of course, but the registrant should always have access to the registration account
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:26) and be able to make whatever changes they choose or are necessary
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:27) Erick, I run into this type of complaint quite a bit
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:27) Andrew McLaughlin's ccTLD update presentation is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/pres/cctld-update.html and is linked off the agenda for this meeting.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:27) here is Mr. Showtime
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:27) yup
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:27) TRANSPARENCY ?!?! that's a good one!
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:28) jedi mind trick
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:28) watch the ICANN technical co-ordination expand into policy for ccTLD's
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:28) sorry back now...had to answer an email
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:28) That's the point of the ccTLD contracts. Policy control
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:28) Let's hope the ccTLDs have what it takes to stick together and not allow that intrusion, squiggles
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:28) Eric, check the thread.
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:29) yup. they need to tell ICANN to stick it where the sun doesn't shine
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:29) squiggles, I wouldn't put it quite that way, but they really need to stay strong
<EricBeck> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:29) Leah: true, in the case of the registrant maintaining control, the most important thing is the admin email address, which should at all times be the registrant, not the ISP
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:29) mclaughlin would enjoy that
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:29) the ccTLD's need to have root entries, and THAT'S all that should involve ICANN
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:30) Eric, it goes further than that... I'll msg you
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:30) Didn't Peter say earlier that ICANN never formally incorporated GAC principals?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:30) Eric, read my comments re 800.
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:31) ICANN just uses the parts of the GAC principals they want when it is convenient for them
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:31) That applies to everything ICANN does
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:32) everyone DOES NOT agree
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:32) This is like the 5th time he's used the word "transparent" :)
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:33) When Andrew speaks my keyboard feels slimey.
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:33) him and Louis
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:33) hi Kendall!
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:33) hi joanna!
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:33) And Sims!
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) mission creep at its best
<SotirisSotiropoulos1> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) gotta go
<SotirisSotiropoulos1> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) bye all
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) bye
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) hi and bye sotiris
<squiggles> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) bye
<SotirisSotiropoulos1> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:34) hi and bye kendall
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:36) snickers at the last couple of slides...
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:37) chop chop chop
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:38) "the goverment needs to be the guardian of the local interests"
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:38) there is a quote for you!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:38) China
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:38) what about China?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:38) LOL
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:39) (stop reading my mind)
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:40) read: we dont need their permission to go forward
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:40) Australoa
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:40) lia
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:41) maybe the ccTLD's mean that ICANN isn
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:41) .... comprehensice - legal terminology for jibberish
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:41) isn't listening.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:41) very difficult to get community feedback when you shut out most of the wrold
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:41) world
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:42) they need "community feedback" so they can ignore it
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:42) so that are "transparent"
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:42) they
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:42) define community
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:43) everyone in the world who is not with ICANN or VeriSign
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:43) people they do lunch with?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:43) a new logo?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:43) under construction
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:43) community input = words on a website ignored by ICANN except to say they provide the forum
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:44) Look at the presentation.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:44) Kendall...they have absolutely no intention of asking anyone outside of ICANN or VerSign anything - they just open a public forum and ignore it
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:45) exactly right!
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:45) I have a great new logo for ICANN - a swatika
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:45) i got a 404 on the presentation
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:45) swastika
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:46) I missed it - what did Peter day?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:46) actually, joanna i'm thinking more of a red flag with an arm and sickle
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:46) one party with one council and a disinformation campaign
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:47) divide and conquer
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:47) ooooooh peter is not happy
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:47) I wouldn't insult the Russians
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:47) Peter was saying that the ccTLDs are not represented properly?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:48) ICANN doesn't like the ccTLD contract the constituency wrote, so now they want to separate them one by one.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:48) joanna, not the Russians. It was the USSR
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:48) true
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:48) The russian people were duped
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:48) peter's trying to teach them how to send email. Vint wants it taken offline, always a sign a point has been made
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:49) they were not allowed to know what the rest of the world was doing and were brainwashed to believe that what they had was best for them
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:49) ICANN Board makes point... everyone else take it offline?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:49) gary, yes, make it secreat
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:49) secret
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:50) remember, joanna, their mantra was they would take over the world
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:50) take it offline!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:50) ICANN wants ccTLDs beholden to all ICANN policies, not just specified ones.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:51) bottom line...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:51) if the cctLDs form an organization to develop their own best practices, all they need from ICANN is dialog and cooperation in some areas...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:51) they should not be subject to ICANN *rules*
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:52) sighs. The final Open Mic is going to be cancled isnt it.
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:52) ICANN MO: Post it the night before and hope that nobody notices
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:52) ICANN has been running over the ccTLD's all year, and nothing has changed at all.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:53) hehe, outrageous is right
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:53) Who is this speaking?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:54) Nigel
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:54) he's right on!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:54) bravo
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:54) Well said Nigel
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:54) going backwards. ICANNs prime directive
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:54) what did he say?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:55) good show, NIgel!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:55) ICANN THRU THE IANA ... uh huh
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:55) he said the ICANN process was a PR exercise, and they deserved a formal response to their proposal, not one imposed by Andrew
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:55) The gentleman who spoke very briefly after him
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:56) bullhockey
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:56) scribe - ???
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:56) whats elizabeth going on about - did not understa nd her
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:57) Ben, where are the scrige notes for all these speakers?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:57) and theres no scribe notes on it
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:57) this is imortant dialog. It should be scribed
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:57) Ben?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:58) we need to organize transcripts of all these videos, any volunteers?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:58) I was going to ask the same thing
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:58) key comment: Andrew said that re-delegation (nothing more than an admin change) requires a written agreement - e.g. contract
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:58) The scribe-to-IRC gateway failed temporarily, and is working again as of a minute ago.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:59) Ben, bad timing, eh?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 15:59) that means if a ccTLD should change admins, for any reason they would have to enter into contract with ICANN or the change would not be made - blackmail
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:00) similar is not good enough
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:00) All of the Scribe's notes are available in full at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/archive/scribe-pf-090901.html and are up-to-date at that url. That includes any notes that did not get picked up in the scribe-to-IRC gateway.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:00) both must be posted
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:00) 244 emails / copies / meeting chair too much?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:00) oh bullhockey
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:01) Thanks Rebecca
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:01) why not, Andrew?
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:01) they never scribe anything thats important
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:01) Forget your document, focus our's. Can anyone be taking this seriously?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:01) forget the other stuff and focus on the substance: are the CCtld's requests the "stuff" and the ICANN demands the "substance" ?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:01) Yes, judith, too much to consider the voices of all countries in the world
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:03) Good question from Sue :)
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:03) Lynn makes Mike Roberts look like a good guy!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:03) but tech contact does
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:03) Stuart, invent a new policy, quick
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:04) he is a master at the ICANN game already!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:05) but a radical change in a nameserver is a redelegation.
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:05) why?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:05) She's good.
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:05) A change of nameserver is not a redelegation, unless we say so. But it needs aprovial anyway.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:06) lol
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:06) why does the Dept. of Commerce have a say over what Australia does?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:06) so we hold your changes hostage
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:06) so a datacenter goes belly up and they change providers.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:07) so the ccTLDs can't do anything without ICANN's knowledge and consent
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:07) a nameserver change is a change in the rootzone, dummy
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:07) and the US Dept. of Commerce too
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:07) thank you for clarifying that Vint
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:08) did Vint just contradict Andrew
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:08) ?
<SusanCrawford> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:08) vint says "operator" change is a redelegation; lynn says "technical contact" is a redelegation. who is right?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:08) well, he just said it again
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:08) Scribe, you are taking very selective notes.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:09) a change of operator for a "server' is not a change of admin
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:09) give me a break
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:09) Judith, you may want to review the FAQ at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/scribefaq
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:09) ... and then submit a change request via http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/montevideo/suggestachange
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:09) Vint did say there was no board resolution, only staff given a 'sense'...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:10) anyone here from ccTLDs?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:10) Ben, perhaps we'll be fortunate enough to have this whole matter transcribed, and then submit that change.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:11) Ben, can we request proper transcripts of these discussions being done in future?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:11) doesn't the software exist for this stuff?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:11) they don't benefit the ccTLD's.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:11) What would the cost be for a transcriber at the meetings in English?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:11) should get a court reporter
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:12) exactly. What would the cost be?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:12) we need a court stenographer
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:12) I think we should research that and perhaps have a fund drive for it since it is to the benefit of all of us
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:12) rudimentary written documentation ~ Another ICANN specialty
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) I would support it
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) Andrew is frustrated. He's meeting his match in the ccTLDs
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) LOL
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) Yes, Sue is very very good.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) It's about time
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) Kendall and I did some transcripts from Stockholm, it's time consuming to stop start
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) Yes, she is. didn't back down
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:13) very.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) joanna, it really does require a court stenographer
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) It would not cost much to have all proceedings transcribed after the event
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) It would require at least two per day
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) Joanna, any chance you checked on the rate for a professional transcriber? We really should get this particular topic transcribed at least, and we could share the cost among a number of us.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) for each meeting
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) but timing is of the essence
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) someone slap that man. His tone annoys me.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) So, the Hans in this room is not the real hans.
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) hans?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) any secretary can do it from an audio tape
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:14) last name is spelled wrong I think
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:15) joanna, it's much more expensive that way, actually. I have done transcriptions for years
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:15) did he cough? I think so? :)
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:15) finally! some local interaction?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:15) For the GA meeting, I sent a request through to ask Ben to break down the various video into 10-15 minute bites, it's much easier to relocate later.. He did that, which is great!
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:15) good for fockler
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:16) correction - I asked Danny to pass on to Ben - and that is a great imprtovement from Stockholm
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:16) roger and kendall its really me. my tone was colored by irritation because of peter's approach
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:16) Joanna, I believe that the archives reflect that we have done that since the first ICANN meeting in Cambridge, MA in November 1998!
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:17) The last time I checked on hiring a court steno, it was around $35/hr
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:17) Ben - if you say so, but there is much improvement for the GA session this time over Stocklholm
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:17) plus travel for two - four of them for four days
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:17) maybe use some Outreach & Education funding?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:17) Leah, what about a professional transcriber?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:17) to go over these remotes?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:18) transcribers are equally expensive per hour and it takes four times as long to transcribe from tape
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:18) Ben, the problem is in these open Mic sessions, when it's impossible to break down the various contributors, except by providing time-code reference afterwards....and there are no time code refs on the scribe notes
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:18) then there is an additional charge to produce the actual transcripts
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:18) but, in the "big picture" the cost of transcribing the meetings in English cost nothing
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:19) the Internet users deserve a text translation
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:19) If we could find court stenos to transcribe from webcasts, it would help. However, I'd like to also see transcripts from other meetings not webcast
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:19) Me too
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:20) If we could get Time-code refs onto the scribe notes, say every 10 miuntes, insert time and date, then you could cross reference to video
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:20) like the NC and GA
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:20) Leah, you don't need Court stenos to transcribe (unless more cost effective) - any TV production assistant can do
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:21) For four transcribers per day, I figure $1400 per day plus travel
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:22) he is speaking of kings?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:22) leah??? They don't need to be there, they can do it remotely
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:22) Why four?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:22) joanna, only for the webcast meetings
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:22) stenos have to take breaks more frequently than the meeting allows
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:22) Which other meetings do you want to do?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:23) we'd have to look into that. There are many meetings going on there that impact all of us
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:23) the transcripts are for the public benefit, but ICANN is not about to pay for it, so we should
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:23) and they won't cover the SO's, ALSC outreach, etc.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:23) Leah - I think it could be done much cheaper than you think if you are willing to accept it posted say 4 hours after session
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:23) keep us from the bar ?!?!?!
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:24) There are several good isues on the Real Time Comments.
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:24) ALSO yes definitely
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:24) It can be posted a day or two later. That's not the issue, IMO
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:24) They would become legal documents
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:24) Then it's cheap. I bet I could get the whole thing doen for $1400
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:24) done
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:25) I doubt it, Joanna, but please look into it.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:25) This particular ccTLD dialogue is important to capture because it is so revealing.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:25) they have to be verbatim transcripts
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:26) verbatim would be nice
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:26) joe, it's a must
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:26) here comes afilias spin
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:26) ... the emotion of the complaints, the condescention and contradictions in the answers, etc.
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:27) you mean bullshit - right judith - plain language to describe what goes on here
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:27) a verbatim text-only copy of what is said
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:28) kendall, a legal transcript
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:28) You could add the emotions, contradictions as editorial comments
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:28) by a certified court reporter
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:28) affiulias is a mess
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:28) I'd like to direct the attention of all those discussing transcription to the information posted at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/scribefaq. This document includes the rationale for the nature of the scribe's notes as well as the method for getting alternative sets of notes (such as the transcript you may seek to provide) included in the archives of the meeting.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:29) that's fine, Rebecca. We're not trying to hide anything. It's FOR the public
<baptista> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:29) affilias i think is realizing how badly it has scrrewed up
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:29) Bob Connelly certainly did,
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:30) Rebecca - link gets error 404
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:30) Leah, you don't need a "legal" transcript - the transcript is not an interpretation. That's the problem with the scribe notes - they mislead (although better than nothing)
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:30) I just want verbatim, bad grammar and all ...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:30) joanna, in order to avoid that type of question, it needs to be a certified transcript
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:30) joe, see my asillyass thing here, more to come: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=352&mode=nested&order=1
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:31) leah, I completely disagree. If somebody can go in there and dispute it's not word perfect, then the credibility is questionable. But if the job is done professionally, there is no problem
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:31) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/scribefaq/
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:31) what is questionable is the scribe notes
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:32) it is impossible for Ben et al to do the job properly - they do the best they can, and rely on speakers to correct them
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:33) My own scribe notes include several things I just did not say. Of course somebody listening and precis live is bound to mishear stuff, and no time to correct
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:33) Rebecca, where on the FAQ might we find info re transcription?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:34) moral responsibility? What about legal responsibility?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:34) Danny?
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:34) Leah, I'm only talking about webcast meetings, for meetings that are not webcast, we need a sound tech to be there
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:35) wonders if the questions placed on the Real-Time comment que during the break for the Open Mic will be considered...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:35) many times not, barberio
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:36) at most one or two
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:36) Working Group C made some valuable contributions as well
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:36) Well, it looks like thats it for open mike...
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:36) The WG's reports were not representative of the actual consensus
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:37) Judith?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:37) yea?
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:37) enlighten please since you were on WG-B
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:38) still thinks that the people who add real time comments should be allowed a chance to 'moderate up' other peoples comments.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:38) WG-B came to consensus that there could be no consensus. Much like WIPO II, only WG-B's was about famous marks. Chair Mike Palage took it upon himself to morph famous marks to marks, and feed his own sunrise suggestion up to the Names Consel.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:39) counsel
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:40) council...lol
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:40) Officers of the Corporation make US $ 100,000 - 300,000
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:41) I bet we could get a transcriber if we took a bit out of Stuart and Louis' salary
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:41) That should include the GA Chair
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:41) Rebecca, you said the FAQ had info re getting transcription ... where?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:43) Joop never gives up!
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:43) I'm glad he's there.
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:43) Why won't they answer him?
<Rebecca_Nesson> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:44) Judith, the faq does not include information on getting transcription. However, if you do get a transcription done, the FAQ tells you how to have your transcription included in the public archive.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:45) oh.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:45) Peter makes a good point.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:46) ya, stay out of our area or the staff gets it. :)
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:48) Y.J. speaking out about the VeriSign multilingual testbed?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:48) considers revising his qustion to increase the chance of it geting asked.
<GregoryKrajewski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:55) Hey Kendall..
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:55) The Board nevers addresses the real issues!
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:55) Hi Gregory
<GregoryKrajewski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:56) Anything good happen?? I was on earlier, and it was pretty stale..
<GregoryKrajewski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:57) By the way, Just for the record I think Image Online Design should receive serious consideration at the next TLD selection board meeting...
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:57) Is it just me, or was that just a string of jibberish to explain why the taskforce hasnt done anything?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:57) The Board just ignores the questions asked by Joop
<GregoryKrajewski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:58) Image Online Design's application was right on as far as it's posture on IP protection and registrar fees....
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 16:59) The US Gov't has asked ICANN to create more new TLDs... when will they be created?
<HansKraaijenbrink> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:00) quit
<GregoryKrajewski> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:01) For those ICANN board members that will undoubtedly read this at a later time. Go look at their application.
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:01) is ICANN's meeting at an end?
<Barberio> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:01) Yes
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:01) Thank you for your interest in the Internet?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) is that what he said?
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) that's rich Vint
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) : ( I was just starting to fall asleep! I will have to count sheep now!
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) yes
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) and "thank you for your interest in ICANN"
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) "...now take it offline!"
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) I'm outta here. Leah, Joann, talk with y'all later.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) cya judith
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) bye
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:02) sure thing Judith
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:03) bbfn
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:03) I'm leaving too
<Kendall> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:03) see ya
<joannalane> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:03) bye Gary
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:03) by Kendall will you be here to morrow?
<RogerKeating> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:03) bye all.
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:04) bye roger
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:05) bye everyone
<Leah_G> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:05) see ya'll tomorrow
<BenEdelman> (Sun, September 09, 2001 at 17:08) Good night, folks. Meetings resume tomorrow at 8:30AM