[NCUC-DISCUSS] Meeting with ICANN CEO

[Fouad Bajwa]

With only 30 mins at hand and attempting to concretely introduce NCUC and
also learning the views about NCUC from the otherside, shouldn't there be
more direct requests that may see some positive consideration. I mean,
certain issues mentioned here can be raised and addressed during other meet
points.

I wonder if the issue of ALAC receiving more power on certain issues is due
to the difference of the structures. ALAC as an advisory group and NCUC as
a stakeholder constituency of GNSO  that angle not being adequately
addresses. I want to go into the details of this but just to remain on
topic, the 30 mins need to be used wisely and there should be some kind of
followup mechanism that NCUC can monitor.

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

> I think Matt makes a good point.
>
>
>
> Also, and while I largely agree with this, what is the point of bringing
> this up?  Are we asking for some review of the Accountability mechanisms?
> Are we asking him  to keep an eye on their possible collusion?   If I were
> Goran I would say - and so what do you think should be done about this?
>
>
>
> I think being aware of it is the main thing that needs to be done. But I
> agree that in a short conversation this might come across as nothing more
> than badmouthing the other groups, which we don’t want to do. Probably best
> to focus on PICs as an issue rather than the fact that ALAC and GAC are
> pushing for them in ways that threaten to transgress mission limitations.
> It is continually disconcerting that ALAC, which purports to be
> representative of individual users’ rights, shows no concern at all about
> the free expression limitations, mission creep problem, associated with
> PICs.
>
>
>
> On the other hand I disagree with Bill’s implication that we were and are
> not unified on this. Our NCUC representatives to the CCWG Accountability
> were with only one exception strongly critical of the distribution of
> voting power in the reform plan. The one person who dissented filed what
> she herself called “a minority dissent”
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>


-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Public Policy Analyst
Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170207/61b53850/attachment-0002.html>