[ncsg-policy] Draft of statement for workshop on new gTLDs

[Beau Brendler]

Greetings, colleagues...

Alex and I are just getting our feet on the ground, having just made some final updates to the candidate consumer constituency charter proposal yesterday. Indeed, we thank you for the rapid response. And I note that Alex has already sent a note indicating candidate consumer constituency support.

However, as co-chair of the as-yet-to-be-approved constituency, I have some minor concerns, specifically, items in section 6 and section 11. We will need to confer with the members of our proposed constituency in more detail before we can join in support.

If time is of the essence, then, like the NPOC, I would suggest that this be represented as a statement of the NCUC and not the proposed consumer constituency. We need to do our due diligence with our membership before supporting a statement before we are even officially formed.

I'm happy to try to convene internal discussion on this here in San Francisco as time permits, but it would have to be after Tuesday.

Regards,

Beau Brendler



-----Original Message-----
>From: Debra Hughes <HughesDeb at USA.REDCROSS.ORG>
>Sent: Mar 14, 2011 1:20 PM
>To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>Subject: Re: [ncsg-policy] Draft of statement for workshop on new gTLDs
>
>Avri, Konstantinos, Robin and Mary,
>
>Thank you so much for working on this draft under such a tight deadline.
>
>
>I have not had the opportunity to discuss with my NPOC colleagues, but
>after my review this morning, I think it would be best if this was
>submitted as a NCUC statement, or perhaps a joint statement between NCUC
>and the proposed Consumer Const, if they approve.  I think it is
>important for this viewpoint to be shared, even if I and my NPOC
>colleagues do not support the conclusions and content.  I would ask that
>you clearly state the statement does not represent those of the members
>of the Proposed Not-for-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency.
>
>From the perspective of a non-profit organization that needs effective
>and efficient and reasonable means to execute and protect its
>philanthropic, capacity-building and humanitarian activities online
>(underscored by nefarious activity occurring now related to the disaster
>in Japan and the pacific area) I have serious concerns supporting the
>positions taken related to Section 6, among other areas - although I
>acknowledge the difference in perspectives.
>
>Thanks,
>Debbie
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ltu.se]
>Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 11:58 AM
>To: ncsg-policy at n4c.eu Committee
>Cc: NCSG Members List
>Subject: [ncsg-policy] Draft of statement for workshop on new gTLDs
>
>Hi,
>
>With some help and some editing, I have the draft of the statement I
>intend to use, should a statement be what is mandated.
>
>https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Board-GAC+Workshop+S
>corecard+March+2011
>
>I have not finished the table at the bottom  yet, but will be working on
>that during the meeting.
>
>Please discuss the wording, and in so far as we have consensus or rough
>consensus on wording changes, I will make changes.  The views in this
>have been generated from previous positions NCSG has taken in statements
>and elsewhere.  The original ratings were done with the help of
>Konstantinos and Robin.  They have been reviewed by Mary.
>
>
>a.