[NCUC-EC] [PC-NCSG] NCSG Meetings Plan for ICANN #47 in Durban

[Robin Gross]

Thanks, Bill and all.  A few comments below.

On Jul 5, 2013, at 1:53 AM, William Drake wrote:

> Hi Folks
> 
> I can't write to NCSG EC, which was copied on the original (someone could forward please?) but I can write to NCUC EC, so copied here.
> 
> Since the constituency-level stuff is slighter and easier, I'm pretty much ready to send out an integrated listing of NCUC activities, but with one big caveat—the SG level stuff UC people should be encouraged to participate in seems to be in varying states of organization.  Shall we try to have a little focused conversation to nail stuff down for announcement?  After all we arrive at the Hilton in a week.
> 
> On Jul 2, 2013, at 9:25 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Link to NCSG Meetings in Durban Planning Document:
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dEN6SHM2U2VZalQ4MXMzNWtneWJrWnc&usp=sharing
> 
> This is really useful and someday may I should do the same.  For now, extracting the action points:
> 
> --------
> 
> Sunday
> 
> NCSG Policy Cmte 16-18:00
> 
> No chair named.  Can I propose David?

Yes, - I've asked David if he can chair this discussion.
> 
> Possible Discussion Topics:	
> Prep. for Thursday's G-Council Mtg
> Prep. for NCSG w/Board Mtg on Tuesday
> Directory Services
> *If there's the intention to propose a PDP re: the recon, that that would seem like something that might eat much of the hour.

Will add PDP on TM+50
> 
> *Any other pressing stuff?  Otherwise I suspect we'll need less than 2hrs.

Topics 1 and 2 will have a dozen sub-parts.  The various meaty issues we discuss with the board makes the PC mtg a meatier discussion than what it may seem above.  This PC mtg time should be used for the PC to get their ducks in a row for the board discussion on a number of meaty topics, like recon request, article 29 letter, policy movements toward censorship, etc.  And again to get the PC ducks in a row for the GNSO Council votes and discussions on Wed. 
> 
> 
> 18:15 NCSG Cocktails with ICANN Board of Directors
> 
> One would guess some of them might ask what our next steps on Recon are.  Do we just wing it or want a messaging plan? Anything else we'll like to stick in their eares?

I'd suggest a message over the need to preserve bottom-up, community-led policy for Internet governance.  Insist that staff follow the rules.  The Board should stop sucking up to GAC, etc.

> 	
> 
> Tuesday
> 
> NCSG meeting, 13:30-15:30
> 
> Avri chair
> 
> Possible Discussion Topics:	
> Update from constituencies on morning meeting
> Prep. for NCSG w/Board Mtg on Tuesday	
> Q: This seems a bit thin for two hours?  And item 2's already been covered in the PC. Could add NomCom letter. Anything else?  Or seems a short meeting

Wasn't meant to be a complete agenda - just a start.  But do we need to talk about the NomCom letter?  How about we send it before the 14th?  I think we just do it now.
> 
> 
> 15:30-16:30 Discussion with Board
> 
> Avri again
> 
> Possible Discussion Topics:	
> the question ICANN's committment to the bottom-up community-led model for Internet governance	
> Inclusive outreach strategy / scaling participation in ICANN	
> GNSO Review / Restructuring	
> policy movements toward censorship (control of Internet content via DNS)	
> These seem ok although one can easily imagine the guarded answers we'll be getting.  Is there an intent to push the Recons stuff specifically?  Do we need a division of labor by topic or just leave it all in Avri's lap to introduce and frame each piece?

When I have chaired this discussion, I've asked someone from NCSG to speak to each one of the points and try to provide a starting point for the topic's discussion.  Of course anyone can speak and we desperately need more individual engagement from our members in these discussions.  But as the person who is wearing the heels for NCSG's side of this discussion, I'l let Avri manage it as she sees fit.

> 
> 
> 1830-19:30 CSG Drink
> 
> Any agenda items to push or just schmooze?  Do we either want to bother with why no House meeting questions?

I think this schmooze is instead of the formal house meeting but that is just a perception.  I don't think more meetings with CSG are needed in Durban.
> 
> 
> Thursday
> 
> Public Forum
> 
> Possible interventions:	
> 
> the question ICANN's committment to the bottom-up community-led model for Internet governance	
> Inclusive outreach strategy / scaling participation in ICANN	
> Q: I'd think a statement with ALAC on Friday would fit here. Anything else?
> 
AGreed.  Do we have volunteers from the folks who will be on the ground in Durban to make these interventions?

> 
> Some Unidentified Time
Gisella is working on finding a time for this discussion.  Stay tuned.
> 
> Discussion with At-Large
> 
> co-chair WK
> 
> Process of adoption of TM+50 policy
> Request for return of Friday meetings during ICANN week
> Possible common policy goals for new gtlds
> Policy v Implementation
> Joint Statement Delivered in Thursday's Public Forum
> 
> Q: some more focused and action-oriented than others.  Olivier tends to prefer actionable items to let's chat items.  Should we press them on whether they'd support whatever we're doing on Recon?  Could some Councilors lead on that discussion item?
> 
I don't think we'll have time for all of these topics.  It is the list that has been suggested by various members and we may need to focus the discussion on what we can do in Durban (complete joint statement on TM+50 and Friday meetings return?)   Or perhaps we don't need discussion of those two topics because from the discussions we've had, we seem in agreement and what we need now are drafters?????

That's all for now.  Thanks!

Robin

> 
> 
> 	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130707/8d0dbb08/attachment.html>