SPAM-LOW: Constituencies, old and new

[Andrew A. Adams]

Rosemary Sinclair wrote:
> Interesting - what is the status of the Interim Charter? Only a Work in Progress doc?? Then everyone is bound by Board approved Charter?

Definition of the terms I've been using. Sorry for any confusion I've induced.

Interim Charter: the Board-approved charter under which the NCSG currently 
operates and under which our GNSO COuncil seats operate.

The Board agreed that this charter was not the final one and would be 
replaced by a new one acceptable to both the Board (read: the staff, really) 
and the NCSG membership, as soon as possible. However, this ASAP has been 
dragging on and on because that staff are being intransigent as documented by 
Milton, Robin and others. One of the big issues many of us have with this 
charter is the linking of representation on the GNSO Council to siloed 
constituencies (each member can only be  member of one constituency) and 
representation on the NCSG Board to sioled constituencies.


Final Charter: what we're working towards: a charter that the staff are 
willing to recommend to the Board that can also gain suitable approval from 
the existing NCSG membership at the time it is proposed to them.

The model put forward in our original charter and that we're still hoping to 
get adopted is that constituencies are subgroups which are not siloed 
(members can take part in multiple constituencies) and where representation 
on the GNSO Council and NCSG Board are drawn by majority vote of the NCSG as 
a whole, one member one vote, and not tied to constituencies at all, although 
political sense would be for strong constieuncies to seek to support members 
of their constituency for Board elections.



-- 
Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/