<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>As someone who always reads everything, but extremely rarely comments, I think this is the right response. A big plus one. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Aaron Eitan Meyer, Esq. <br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Sep 12, 2016, at 1:22 PM, Nadira Alaraj <<a href="mailto:nadira.araj@gmail.com">nadira.araj@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><p dir="ltr">Dear Tapani & all,<br>
As it had been said here the silent majority might not be active for many reasons, one of the cases mentioned that they might be in the learning stage. <br>
However, a good practice is to do housecleaning for the mailing list. Some emails might be bouncing back others might changed their work emails and never attempted to replace their email.<br>
Those handful of nonexistent emails could be removed after listing them to the community to reach their owners if they know any updates about them.<br>
Best wishes,<br>
Nadira Alaraj</p>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sep 9, 2016 3:55 PM, "Tapani Tarvainen" <<a href="mailto:ncuc@tapani.tarvainen.info">ncuc@tapani.tarvainen.info</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Mark,<br>
<br>
I think you may have misunderstood the intent here.<br>
<br>
For NCSG the concept of passive membership is well-defined,<br>
it's in the charter: you will be considered passive if you<br>
do not respond to the yearly voter registration or check-in<br>
process NCSG conducts before each election. It has nothing<br>
to do about activity on the mailing lists.<br>
<br>
And the idea we've been considering is removing those<br>
who have been passive for many years - those we haven't<br>
been able to reach by any means we've been able to try.<br>
<br>
So all you'd need to do is respond to an email once<br>
every few years to retain membership.<br>
<br>
We may add some extra steps before removing members,<br>
like one additional attempt to reach them, announcement<br>
on the list in case someone there knows them, &c.<br>
<br>
But certainly the intent is not to drive away members<br>
who want to support our cause but do not have the time<br>
to actively engage in mailing lists or otherwise.<br>
All we really need is some assurance that their<br>
email works and that they want to remain members.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Tapani Tarvainen<br>
<br>
On Sep 09 08:13, Mark Leiser (<a href="mailto:markleiser@gmail.com">markleiser@gmail.com</a>) wrote:<br>
<br>
> I would vigorously object at the suggestion that "passive members" get<br>
> kicked out the constituency and would suggest not only is it completely off<br>
> course, but also offensive and counterproductive. I am one of the "passive<br>
> members" you refer to and hardly ever post on these threads, yet I read<br>
> every email and contemplate the implications of the discussions and debates<br>
> that come into my Inbox. I may be a "passive member" here, which is what<br>
> you seem to want to judge me on, but am active in promoting civil society's<br>
> role in Internet Governance in my academic setting (I teach Internet<br>
> Governance on our LLM Programme at my home institute and discuss NCSG's<br>
> role within ICANN to a lesser extent when teaching at the London School of<br>
> Economics.<br>
><br>
> My "passivity" turns "active" when I take what I have learned and through<br>
> silent contemplation, write extensively about the role of civil society in<br>
> Internet Governance and particularly the NCSG's role in fighting back<br>
> against IP owners and other non-state actors over governance.<br>
><br>
> Enter shameless plug for my chapter in the forthcoming Oxford Handbook on<br>
> the Law and Regulation of Technology. Oxford University Press:<br>
> <a href="http://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/54396/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://strathprints.strath.ac.<wbr>uk/54396/</a><br>
><br>
> I feel incredibly passionate about the role of NCUC and NCSG in holding<br>
> ICANN to check. I didn't think I'd have to post here from time to time in<br>
> order to validate my feelings...<br>
><br>
> Mark<br>
><br>
><br>
> Mark<br>
><br>
><br>
> Mark Leiser, BSc, LLB (Hon) | Teaching Associate and PhD Candidate |<br>
> University of Strathclyde | Faculty of Humanities and Social Science | The<br>
> Law School l Centre for Internet Law and Policy | LH306 | Lord Hope<br>
> Building | 141 St James Road | Glasgow G4 0LT | Tel. <a href="tel:%2B44%20141-548-2493" value="+441415482493">+44 141-548-2493</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Email <<a href="mailto:markleiser@gmail.com">markleiser@gmail.com</a>> | Bio<br>
> <<a href="https://www.strath.ac.uk/humanities/courses/gradschool/studentprofiles/markleiser/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.strath.ac.uk/<wbr>humanities/courses/gradschool/<wbr>studentprofiles/markleiser/</a>><br>
> | Twitter <<a href="http://twitter.com/#!/mleiser" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/#!/mleiser</a><wbr>> | LinkedIn<br>
> <<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=189149411&trk=tab_pro" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/<wbr>profile/view?id=189149411&trk=<wbr>tab_pro</a>> | Google+<br>
> <<a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/105289982691060086995/posts" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://plus.google.com/u/0/<wbr>105289982691060086995/posts</a>><br>
><br>
><br>
> On 9 September 2016 at 06:45, Raoul Plommer <<a href="mailto:plommer@gmail.com">plommer@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > This might be completely off course, but should we have a way to kick out<br>
> > passive members, who haven't done anything for ... one or two years? That<br>
> > ten percent could become unattainable eventually.<br>
> ><br>
> > -Raoul<br>
> ><br>
> > On 9 September 2016 at 02:59, Rafik Dammak <<a href="mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com">rafik.dammak@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> >> Hi everyone,<br>
> >><br>
> >> I am glad to share with you this important announcement, on behalf of<br>
> >> NCUC EC, to start the NCUC Bylaws change process.<br>
> >><br>
> >> There were previously several attempts to amend the bylaws/charter to<br>
> >> update it and align it with NCSG charter. For this time and as the bylaws<br>
> >> allowed it, the NCUC EC decided to work as drafting team and propose an<br>
> >> amended draft version for consultation based on previous drafting teams and<br>
> >> volunteers work. I want to thank everyone who participated on those<br>
> >> precedent efforts.<br>
> >><br>
> >> In term of timeline, we are going to follow this basically:<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> - *Call for input*, *first reading* from *9th September till 8th<br>
> >> Octobe*r<br>
> >><br>
> >> NCUC Charter Amendments<br>
> >> <<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wYP4-JGKA_u6QligvViBkygzj8Q62kmFF-ky5XSWWDU/edit#heading=h.30j0zll" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/<wbr>document/d/1wYP4-JGKA_<wbr>u6QligvViBkygzj8Q62kmFF-<wbr>ky5XSWWDU/edit#heading=h.<wbr>30j0zll</a>><br>
> >> First Draft<br>
> >><br>
> >> NB During this time, the EC will regularly monitor the doc for questions<br>
> >> and comments and attempts to resolve them. Teleconferences can be held as<br>
> >> well to resolve issues and update members on our progress<br>
> >><br>
> >> - *First resolution of comments* 8th October to 9th October by NCUC<br>
> >> EC<br>
> >> - *Call for input, second reading* for amended draft, *9th October<br>
> >> to 9th November*<br>
> >> - *Consultation about the charter during NCUC ad-hoc meeting* in<br>
> >> Hyderabad (tentative date is 6th November)<br>
> >> - *Final call* : *9th November to 12th November* , to take note of<br>
> >> any objections<br>
> >> - *Final draft ready* by *13th November* to be approved by NCUC EC<br>
> >> - * Voting *in parallel with NCUC election (tentative dates *14 Nov.<br>
> >> - 27 Nov*) to adopt the new charter.<br>
> >> - *When adopted*, informing the ICANN staff about the new charter,<br>
> >> process with ICANN board/staff/OEC (Organizational Effectiveness<br>
> >> Committee) starts. That process is outlined and explained at the bottom<br>
> >><br>
> >> As working method, we are going to follow this:<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> - The clean version of draft is shared in google doc here<br>
> >> <<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wYP4-JGKA_u6QligvViBkygzj8Q62kmFF-ky5XSWWDU/edit?usp=sharing" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/<wbr>document/d/1wYP4-JGKA_<wbr>u6QligvViBkygzj8Q62kmFF-<wbr>ky5XSWWDU/edit?usp=sharing</a>> and<br>
> >> you can find the attached redline version to see the changes. For<br>
> >> those who cannot access we can provide a doc version and will input their<br>
> >> comments on their behalf. The google doc is in comments mode (and keeping<br>
> >> trace of the discussion, please identify yourself when you comment) and<br>
> >> your input is highly encouraged to be made there but discussion can<br>
> >> happen in NCUC list.<br>
> >> - Farzaneh as EC member will be the editor/penholder. The EC will<br>
> >> respond to the comments and try solve any issue or questions.<br>
> >> - During each readings, we will try to resolve comments, explain<br>
> >> rationale behind amendments. We will keep a clean version as output from a<br>
> >> reading .<br>
> >> - We will organize conference calls during each reading/consultation<br>
> >> to respond to questions and resolve pending issues, in addition to a<br>
> >> dedicated session in Hyderabad ICANN meeting (where remote participation<br>
> >> channels will be provided too)<br>
> >> - We will organize a first a Q&A call about the process and to<br>
> >> clarify about ICANN process side. We will create a page in our website to<br>
> >> document the process and keep the documents there for tracking.<br>
> >> - The NCUC EC will respond to questions/inquiries in the mailing list.<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> *Adoption process*<br>
> >><br>
> >> according to section VIII of the current bylaws, to amend the bylaws we<br>
> >> need:<br>
> >><br>
> >> *A. Changes to this charter may take place by vote of the<br>
> >> Members. Changes may be proposed by the Executive Committee or by petition<br>
> >> of the Members. A petition of ten (10) percent of the then-current members<br>
> >> shall be sufficient for putting a charter amendment on the ballot for<br>
> >> consideration at the next regular election. Alternatively, the Executive<br>
> >> Committee by majority vote may propose an amendment for consideration at<br>
> >> the next regular election.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *B. Charter amendments shall be passed if at least two thirds<br>
> >> of the votes cast in the election favor its adoption (provided 40% or more<br>
> >> of the eligible Voters cast a ballot in the election).*<br>
> >><br>
> >> the voting/election period will take this on consideration (under<br>
> >> discussion currently) with regard to the ballot and procedures to be<br>
> >> defined by the NCUC EC.<br>
> >> *Board/OEC process:*<br>
> >><br>
> >> At a high level, the GNSO Charter Amendment Process involves a total of<br>
> >> four basic phases<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> · Amendment preparations and approval by the charter-amending<br>
> >> community;<br>
> >><br>
> >> · Staff review and analysis of amendments for potential ICANN<br>
> >> organization impacts;<br>
> >><br>
> >> · Review of amendments and opportunity for comment by the<br>
> >> multistakeholder community; and<br>
> >><br>
> >> · Full Board review and action<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> According to ICANN staff, the entire Board review process (which involves<br>
> >> the last three phases of the process) seems to now be taking about 6 or 7<br>
> >> months (calculating from the formal submission of the amendments to<br>
> >> staff). The specifics of the process look like this:<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> *SUMMARY OF GNSO CHARTER AMENDMENT PROCESS (Excerpts)*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *On 28 September 2013, the ICANN Board established a process for the<br>
> >> amendment of GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Charters. That process<br>
> >> is as follows:*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *Phase I: Amendment Preparation*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *GNSO Stakeholder Groups (SGs) and Constituencies should formulate<br>
> >> charter amendments through their own internal processes and notify ICANN<br>
> >> Staff as early as practicable (at **<a href="mailto:policy-staff@icann.org">policy-staff@icann.org</a><br>
> >> <<a href="mailto:policy-staff@icann.org">policy-staff@icann.org</a>>) upon initiation and completion (approval) of such<br>
> >> efforts.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *Phase II: Staff Review*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *Upon formal receipt of the proposed amendment(s) approved by the<br>
> >> community group, ICANN staff will analyze the proposal and, within 10<br>
> >> business days, submit the community proposal with a report to the<br>
> >> appropriate Board committee identifying any fiscal or liability concerns.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *Phase III: Public Comments*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *After Board committee review of the Staff report and the proposed<br>
> >> charter amendments, the Board committee will direct the opening of a Public<br>
> >> Comment Forum. Upon completion of the Forum, within 30 calendar days, staff<br>
> >> will provide a report to the Board committee summarizing the community<br>
> >> feedback.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *Phase IV: Board Review*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *At the next available opportunity after the delivery and publication of<br>
> >> the staff report, the appropriate Board committee shall review the proposed<br>
> >> charter amendments, the staff report and any community feedback and make a<br>
> >> recommendation to the Board.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *After receiving a recommendation from the committee, the Board shall<br>
> >> either:*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *a. **Recognize the proposed charter amendment by a simple majority<br>
> >> vote; or*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *b. **Reject the proposed amendment by a supermajority (2/3) vote<br>
> >> and provide a specific rationale for its concerns.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *c. **If neither above condition is met, the Board will ask for<br>
> >> further explanation of the proposed amendments by the community.*<br>
> >><br>
> >> *In its review of the proposed amendments, the ICANN Board may ask<br>
> >> questions and otherwise consult with the affected SG or Constituency. If it<br>
> >> is not feasible for the Board to take action on the proposed amendments<br>
> >> after two meetings, the Board shall report to the affected SG or<br>
> >> Constituency the circumstance(s) that prevented it from making a final<br>
> >> action and its best estimate of the time required to reach an action. That<br>
> >> report is deemed an "action" under this process. If it is not feasible for<br>
> >> the Board to take action on the proposed amendments after four meetings (or<br>
> >> after a total of six scheduled meetings), the proposed community amendments<br>
> >> will be deemed effective.*<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> The full process is posted on the ICANN GNSO web site at the bottom of<br>
> >> this page –<a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://gnso.icann.org/en/<wbr>about/stakeholders-<wbr>constituencies</a>.<br>
> >> A pdf version of the process can be viewed and downloaded from this link -<br>
> >> <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://gnso.icann.org/en/<wbr>about/stakeholders-<wbr>constituencies</a><br>
> >> /charter-amendment-process-<wbr>28sep13-en.pdf<br>
> >><br>
> >> Please feel free to ask any question or clarification about the process<br>
> >> and the bylaw draft. We need everyone participation in this process.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Best Regards,<br>
> >><br>
> >> Rafik Dammak<br>
> >><br>
> >> NCUC chair<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Ncuc-discuss mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss">http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>