<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Written Feedback On Draft NCSG Charter (v4.0)</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3492" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=055304722-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Sorry,
all, I thought I had forwarded the attachment (the draft) but had not.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=055304722-06022009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>It is attached here. Keep in mind that there are
inconsistencies that we know about but don't want to modify until the rest of
you can comment on where it stands now. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT size=2>Milton Mueller<BR>Professor, Syracuse University School of
Information Studies<BR>XS4All Professor, Delft University of
Technology<BR>------------------------------<BR>Internet Governance
Project:<BR><A
href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org</A><BR></FONT></P>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Non-Commercial User Constituency
[mailto:NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Milton L
Mueller<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, February 06, 2009 2:40 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Written
Feedback On Draft NCSG Charter (v4.0)<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Robert, Denise and Ken</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Thanks a lot for your valuable feedback on our draft Charter (v4.0). It
is clear that we are making progress, although there is a long way to go.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>In
respect to some of your questions or requests for explanation, let me turn the
tables on you a bit. The presumption in many of these exchanges is that
there's something complicated or "different" about what we are proposing, and
that the "constituency-based SG model" is straightforward and poses no
problems. In many ways, however, an integrated SG structure is far simpler,
and we have no idea how a constituency model would work even if we thought it
desirable to implement it.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Let
me give you two examples. I will pose them in the form of questions because i
genuinely would like to have answers from you or any other defender of the
constituency-based SG model.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Q1:
How does a constituency-based model produced balanced geographic
representation in Council seats? </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Think about this. Let's say there are 3 independent constituencies in a
SG, and each of them elects 2 Council seats without reference to the other. So
Constituency A elects (in accord with its own geog. representation rules) a
person from North American and a person from Latin America; Constituency B
elects a person from North America and a person from Latin America; and
Constituency C elects a person from North America and another from Latin
America. End result: each constituency has, on its own, produced as much
geographic diversity as it possibly could, and yet the end result could be
that only two world regions are represented on the Council.
\</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
would be very interested to see how you propose to avoid this problem while
staying in the constituency model.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>An integrated SG model,
by contrast, can impose proportions on the six seats as a whole, thereby
ensuring that most if not all regions are represented. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009></SPAN><SPAN
class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Q2:
How does a constituency-based model apportion Council seats among
Constituencies when they are of different size?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Let's suppose there is an "old constituency" that has 50 members, and a
"new" constituency that starts and gets recognized by the Board, and has
only 10 initial members (or even less). How many Council seats does each
constituency get? Do they inherently get the same number of seats simply by
virtue of the fact that they are constituencies? Or does their representation
on the Council reflect their relative size? If the latter, who decides what
allocation principle is used, when there is no pre-established SG
decision-making method? And once Council seats depend on membership size,
what is to stop one constituency from extending membership in an overly easy
way, regardless of appropriate criteria, to inflate its relative size? Will
the Board monitor this? </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>These questions are not impossible to answer, but they obviously impose
a very complex layer of organization, monitoring and procedure that an
integrated SG model does not have to worry about. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Frankly, Bob and Denise, I could produce about a dozen more
questions like this. But let's see how you do with these two first.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>My
point is to put this discussion of SG models on a more solid footing with an
equal burden of proof. If you can convince us that a constituency-based model
handles such basic and obvious issues as well as an integrated
model, we'd be more inclined to change our view. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=223191419-06022009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>--MM</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>