Results of the Chartering process

Tue Jul 5 22:09:39 CEST 2011

Hello ,

replying late to this thread, yes I looked about academic and technical
group but it is was more to follow the model of Interest Group as suggested
in that time within NCSG and to work on policy instead of spending time only
on administrative work related to forming constituency, but instead to
create that group and to develop it and then to see where it can led . I
approached some people but there was no so much strong interest and I didn't
make any follow-up after that (honestly, I didn't spend so much time or
energy).
anyway, it is ok for me to work with Rosemary and everyone who expressed
interest on academic constituency at least to discuss about its pertinence
and if it can really help to shape policy on specific topics that interest
academic community regarding gTLD.

Best,

Rafik

2011/6/28 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>

> Hi Rosemary,
>
> I personally think that a CC in each of the two SGs might be a solution.
>  Because of the way the GNSO is set up, where Constituencies mean Nomcom
> committee seats and the possibility of filling comments that the Board is
> willing to read because they are from a known entity, and because any
> resources from ICANn will be given to constituencies, I think forming
> Constituencies is a good idea.
>
> As for an academic constituency, if possible you should also consult with
> Rafik, as he was the one selected by the board to look at those interests.
>
> Posting the charters of prospective constituencies publicly, is a good
> idea.  The CC constituency charters have been available on the CC wiki page
> for a while.
>
> a.
>
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 03:18, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> > Rosemary:
> > Can you explain to me how you handle the CSG/NCSG problem? If the answer
> is "CC is only applying to NCSG" I will not consider it an acceptable answer
> and will oppose the formation of this constituency.
> >
> > I will say that in our discussions with ALAC most of the people we talked
> to agreed that it made more sense to advance a consumer agenda than it did
> to form a consumer constituency.
> >
> > --MM
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf
> Of
> >> Rosemary Sinclair
> >> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 9:41 PM
> >> To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> >> Subject: Re: [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS] Results of the Chartering process
> >>
> >> Hi Avri
> >>
> >> I'm prepared to try to progress the Consumer Constituency - having
> >> thought about Milton's idea from NCSG Constituency Day, I still think we
> >> need to move forward with a formal constituency. I'll get on to this
> >> when I'm back in Sydney next week.
> >>
> >> I'll go back to the doc we have in NCSG EC and pick up that process now
> >> NCSG Charter has progressed.
> >>
> >> I have also spoken to Mary briefly about an Academic Constituency - more
> >> relevant to my new role  - I'll have a go at drafting the Mission ...
> >>
> >> One other point that came up in NCSG Constit Day - when we were chatting
> >> about the difference in focus between NCUC and the proposed Consumer
> >> focused Constituency...it occurred to me later that we may have a
> >> communications gap because of the small number of people on the NCSG-EC
> >> where proposed Charters are reviewed....perhaps we need to post proposed
> >> Charters where whole of NCSG can review them...even while the NCSG EC is
> >> focusing more closely on the details and the process????
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Rosemary
> >> ______________________________________
> >> From: NCSG-NCUC [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Avri
> >> Doria [avri at ACM.ORG]
> >> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 8:02 AM
> >> To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> >> Subject: Results of the Chartering process
> >>
> >> At the ICANN41 meeting, in addition to the major decisions regarding the
> >> new gTLD process the Board took several several decisions related to the
> >> the NCSG, the NPOC and the constituency process within the GNSO.
> >>
> >> The specific Board resolutions:
> >>
> >> - NPOC Charter
> >> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.5
> >>
> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.5.rationale
> >>
> >> NPOC charter approved by the Board:
> >> http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/npoc-charter-redacted-07dec10-en.pdf
> >>
> >> I extend a welcome to NPOC as the first new constituency within GNSO
> >> since the beginning of  the GNSO.  Now that the NPOC has been created
> >> and according to the rules of the NCSG, each NCSG member is entitled to
> >> belong to three constituencies with the NCSG, I recommend that NCSG
> >> members take a look at the new constituency and see whether it is a fit
> >> and consider joining our new constituency.  Please note, that will all
> >> constituencies must adhere to the membership rules of the NCSG,
> >> Constituencies can imposes additional requirements - so membership in
> >> the NPOC or NCUC is still determined by the charters and membership of
> >> those constituencies.
> >>
> >> - NCSG Charter
> >> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.6
> >>
> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.6.rationale
> >>
> >> Charter that was approved by the Board
> >> http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/proposed-ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf
> >>
> >> According to our new charter, we now need to approve the new charter.  I
> >> will start that process as soon as possible.
> >>
> >> - Constituency Recognition Process
> >> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.7
> >>
> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.7.rationale
> >>
> >> Process:
> >> http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/newco-recognition-process-10jan11-
> >> en.pdf
> >>
> >> Now that a method for starting new Constituencies has been created, I
> >> suggest that the various interests within NCSG look at whether they wish
> >> to create any new constituencies within NCSG.  While the NCSG charter
> >> dictates that council seats and the NCSG chair are elected by the NCSG
> >> membership at large, a lot of resources within the GNSO, such as Nomcom
> >> representation and representation on the various NCSG committees.
> >>
> >> - The GNSO notification
> >>
> >> Begin forwarded message:
> >>
> >> From: Stéphane Van Gelder
> >> <stephane.vangelder at indom.com<mailto:stephane.vangelder at indom.com>>
> >> Date: 24 June 2011 13:00:35 GMT+08:00
> >> To: "council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org> List"
> >> <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> >> Subject: [council] Adoption of GNSO charters and new GNSO constituencies
> >>
> >> Councillors,
> >>
> >> Just as an FYI, here is an extract from the transcript of today's Board
> >> meeting:
> >>
> >>>> PETER DENGATE THRUSH: WE BEGIN WITH A CONSENT AGENDA, AND FOR THOSE
> >> WHO ARE NEW TO THIS PROCESS THIS IS A THING BY WHICH A NUMBER OF REPORTS
> >> AND THINGS HAVE BEEN WORKED UP THROUGH THE VARIOUS PROCESSES AND COME TO
> >> THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
> >> THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED EACH OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
> >> UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS AND HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE ANY ITEM
> >> FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR PLACEMENT ON THE FULL JEANTD IF IT'S THOUGHT
> >> APPROPRIATE THAT ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION IS REQUIRED ON THESE ITEMS.
> >> JUST BY WAY OF EXPLANATION THEY INCLUDE APPROVAL OF MINUTES, ADOPTING
> >> CHARTERS FOR THE GNSO, A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW CHARTER IN THE GNSO,
> >> APPROVAL OF A CONSTITUENCY RECOGNITION PROCESS, CHANGES TO ADVISORY
> >> COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS, CHANGING THE FORMULATION OF THE NOMINATING SLIDE
> >> IN REGARD TO THE KEAK SLOT, MEETINGS NEXT YEAR IN LATIN AMERICA AND
> >> EUROPE. AND THEN THANKING DEPARTING. AND THANKING OUR HOSTS, AND
> >> THANKING YOU OUR MEETING PRAVERNTS PARTICIPANTS.
> >> SO WITH THAT, I AM GOING TO MOVE FROM THE CHAIR THE ADOPTION OF THE
> >> CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THAT?
> >> THANK YOU, GEORGE.
> >> SO THE MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA IS NOW PUT.
> >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS.
> >> (HANDS RAISED).
> >>>> PETER DENGATE THRUSH: THANK YOU.
> >> ANY OPPOSED?
> >> ANY ABSTENTIONS?
> >> CARRIED.
> >> THANK YOU.
> >>
> >> The consent agenda items that are of particular relevance to the GNSO
> >> were the following:
> >>
> >>
> >> 1.  From the SIC - New GNSO Constituency Recognition Process  2.  From
> >> the SIC - Permanent Charters of the GNSO's Commercial Stakeholders Group
> >> 3.  From the SIC - Permanent Charters of the GNSO's Non Commercial
> >> Stakeholders Group  4.  From the SIC - Proposal for a Not-for-Profit
> >> Operational Concerns Constituency in the GNSO
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Stéphane
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20110706/a1774e48/attachment-0001.html>