[NCUC-EC] August to do [long]

[Edward Morris]

Hi,



> *1. Buenos Aires Travel*
>>
>>
> The Bylaw revision needs to be an EC proposal. The other way of doing it
> not only is unnecessary but our current Bylaws are inconsistent in terms of
> the number of votes needed to get a revision proposal on the ballot. We all
> need to be involved in getting a consensus on the revision we'll as an EC
>  be proposing on CD. I'd suggest, if possible, we all need to be in Buenos
> Aires to properly do this.
>
>
> In formal terms sure.  The EC signs off, but the EC can't monopolize the
> process and shouldn't declare consensus over the objections of members.  EC
> can lead, but others can lead too, and there has to be broad buy in.
>



I totally agree. There is no other way to get this thing passed. I think
our big job is at the beginning and the end: to kick off the process and
then to make sure all the disparate pieces work well together, unlike our
current document, and mesh nicely with what ICANN wants and what the NCSG
has.


>
>
> One thing we should probably do in August is try to bring as many of the
> outputs of these previous efforts together in one place to see what has
> been attempted. I believe Avri has worked on this before, you as well,
> Bill...who else should we be in touch with in this regard?
>
>
> I'm packing to leave so I can dig out the stuff.  There were several
> versions worked on by me, Avri, KK, Robin, Milton, fik….need to assemble
> and compare.
>


Perhaps we can get a work area up and running on our new web site that
includes there earlier efforts?


>
> Perhaps a brief conversation at the outset with someone from legal might
> be valuable - or should we leave this to Mary or Rob?
>
>
>
>
> I definitely do not want to step on anyone's toes, but I, as all of you,
> am aware that  legal is leading an effort for all Constituencies and SG's
> to have ICANN compliant Bylaws, an apparently newly defined order of things.
>
>
> And yet still nobody can join CSG or read the IPC's listserv...
>



Yet once we get that TI audit all...Fadi...you do remember that promise,
don't you?

(I was told in Beijing he'd get back to us on that...a formal letter
perhaps the next step?)

>
> I sense the Bylaw revision is going to be an all time consuming affair.
> From the Friday sessions, to setting up slides, getting our CD presentation
> down, doing the CD and then selling the thing - we have a tough voting
> threshold to meet - doing more might be pushing it.
>
>
> that's what I'm thinking. One major initiative is enough, on top of what's
> already happening with our involvement via GNSO etc.
>
>
> Sadly, agreed.

>
> Do we have any word, Bill, on approval of your requests. The IPC is in an
> uproar over getting their secretariat support proposal declined...how did
> we do?
>
>
> our stuff is still pending, limbo
>


So IPC has enough advance notice so Steve can go on the warpath threatening
to completely dump any pretense of being a good actor because they didn't
get an ICANN funded Secretariat,  and we're in limbo? Oh well...the
deadline for a response from ICANN isn't until June 27th...oops.

Well, at least ICANN has all these fancy automated MIS in place. :)



>
> off to NYC
>


Safe travels.


Ed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130808/f17a8299/attachment.html>