Results of the Chartering process
gakuru at GMAIL.COM
Tue Jun 28 15:23:26 CEST 2011
It would be very sad if we lost the true meaning of "consumer" to
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> 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.
> 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
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> 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...
More information about the Ncuc-discuss