Results of the Chartering process

Thu Jun 30 09:41:35 CEST 2011

Hi Milton

I've got problems with the "advancing an agenda" model - could it apply to Privacy, IP ....to mean we didn't need constituencies in these areas also...

I really think we've dealt with the major problem by de-linking the Council seats

I'll check again with ALAC but a number of their folks have expressed interest in Singapore in advancing the consumer constituency ...

Cheers

Rosemary

Rosemary Sinclair
Director | External Relations 
Australian School of Business | Level 3 Building L5 | UNSW | Sydney  NSW  2052  
Direct:  +61 2 9385 6228 | Fax: +61 2 9385 5933
Email: rosemary.sinclair at unsw.edu.au  www.asb.unsw.edu.au 

       EQUIS accredited for 5 years

-----Original Message-----
From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2011 5:18 PM
To: Rosemary Sinclair; NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: RE: Results of the Chartering process

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