Results of the Chartering process

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

As I said in an earlier note, I am an advocate of there being two Consumer Constituencies - the NCSG-CC and CSG-CC.  The topic seems important enough and diverse enough to have both, just as we now have both an C and a NC constituencies that are predominantly concerned with IP.  The precedent for having both has been established at this point.

As for orgs such as INTUG, that could be handled by the commercial oriented groups having an observer role it the members of the NCSG-CC were interested.

I have copied the Consumer Constituency list since the issue concerns that list and not all of that list's members are on the NCSG list.

a.



On 28 Jun 2011, at 11:03, David Cake wrote:

> At 4:23 PM +0300 28/6/11, Alex Gakuru wrote:
>> It would be very sad if we lost the true meaning of "consumer" to large/corporate users.
> 
> 	Whatever we call them, organisations like INTUG (that Rosemary was formerly Chair of) I think would be very valuable within ICANN, have a very valid role to play, and clearly are in support of the consumer agenda theough they represent mostly business users of telecomms not individuals. I fully support such organisations being represented within ICANN.
> 	But as commercial users, while they have more in common in attitude with NCSG, they technically belong in CSG. Hence we have a problem - how is NCSG to support such organisation without admitting them as members?
> 	I think working to a constructive solution to this issue would be more valuable than either ignoring the issue or moving ahead with a constituency strategy that doesn't take into acocunt some really valuable organisations.
> 	Regards
> 		David
> 

------
Pick your poison: Kool-Aid or Hemlock!