<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Dear Robin</div><div><br></div><div>Yes, it is very important to highlight all of the names of the organizations and individuals who had previously commented on this issue. I must admit that I also personally think that may be some ICANN staff are also not fully aware of how our internal civil society procedures works in order to get support to some sort of petitions ..... they might be aware of some coalitions that are open but not for others. Each group have their own internal dynamics. This are my personal observations of this process.</div><div><br></div><div>My two cents. </div><div><br></div><div>Best, Katitza</div><br><div><div>On Aug 10, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Robin Gross wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Katitza,<div><br></div><div>I agree with your suggestion. We can note in the letter all of the names of the organizations and individuals who had previously commented on this issue. There seems to have been serious disconnect between the facts of this situation and the "facts" that the board members were given by staff. The decision was entirely engineered to have a single result and we need to show that.</div><div><br></div><div>Cedric,</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks very much for volunteering to take the first stab at drafting this letter. We can discuss it in more detail at the NCUC constituency call tomorrow, so you know more specifics about what to include in it.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Robin</div><div><br><div><div>On Aug 9, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Dear Bill:</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><br></font></div><div>Interesting parallel: I asked Rob in a GNSO council meeting, and reiterated in my submission to the public comment period, that statements made in support of the NCUC version by NCUC members and hundreds (counting the Internet Governance Caucus etc) of external supporters in the public comment period ending 15 April be taken into account in the summary of the PC ending 23 July. The reasons for doing so were straightforward: there was no reason to believe that the organizations and individuals that said they supported the NCUC model and therefore rejected the opposite model had changed their positions, so they should not be required to all mobilize and restate their stances a couple months later, in the summer travel season (although some did). The suggestion was not acted upon or even mentioned in the staff summary.</div></div></blockquote></div><br><div><br></div><div>We need to write a letter to the Chairman of the Board and all the Board Members explaining:</div><div><br></div><div>a. NCUC proposal & the support it got (signatures orgs + individuals + coalitions).</div><div>b. Explain why we consider there were not a bottom up approach (and how we get ignore it).</div><div>c. Would be nice to analyzed the ICANN's last proposal and attached comments to it. </div><div><br></div><div>We do not need to ask for more signatures. We need to attached those signatures we already collect and enforce what we already request. I am pretty sure that many board members are not aware of our NCUC process to get consensus on documents. how the NCUC proposal were discussed in different mailing lists, nor how NGOs get their consensus through their own organizations structures/memberships/coalitions, etc. </div><div><br></div><div>My two cents. Unfortunately, I am not able to help right now as I am very busy. But Cedric Laurant has volunteer to write the letter if NCUC Steering Committee agree on this. </div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div>Katitza</div></blockquote></div><br><div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; "><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="khtml-block-placeholder"></div><div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder"></div><div>IP JUSTICE</div><div>Robin Gross, Executive Director</div><div>1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA</div><div>p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451</div><div>w: <a href="http://www.ipjustice.org">http://www.ipjustice.org</a> e: <a href="mailto:robin@ipjustice.org">robin@ipjustice.org</a></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"> </div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>