"NCUC opposes constituencies"

[Alex Gakuru]

Just wondering...

Could NCUC assist the Board improve its accountability, credibility,
and its public perception by rightfully raising our constituency's
concerns urgin the board to avoid 'seemingly staff/SIC besieged
Board'?  While we recognise and appreciate the great work by staff/SIC
on behalf and the direction of the Board, we are conscious that the
ultimate responsibility of decisions made lies squarely on Board
members.

For this reason, we are urge the Board to note and keep record of
every staff/SIC member against whom repeated complaints of acting as
'frolic of their own' are leveled against?

Alex

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> The SIC charter was 100% drafted internally by staff (presumably at
> Roberto's direction).
> There is not 1 word in the SIC charter that was contributed by NCUC or its
> members.
> We cannot pretend that the SIC charter was some kind of compromise that
> reached the middle ground of competing agendas.  It was the total
> displacement of the consensus charter with the staff/SIC written charter.
> I do not plan to belabor this point, unless we hear these ridiculous claims
> to the contrary as was done here.
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2009, at 3:09 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Very good reply, Bill. I like the way you got tough with him on the
> “top-down” question.
> Incredible that this guy can rationalize his actions as “consultative” when
> NO efforts were EVER made by SIC to contact anyone in NCUC involved in
> developing our charter. And he still refuses to acknowledge that the
> enormous public comment response we got – on an obscure charter issue, for
> God’s sake – actually means something.
>
> --MM
>