[NCUC-EC] NCUC Bylaws Revision => 1) Policy Committee, 2) Constituency Day, 3) Friday 15 November

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi Bill,


> *1) Policy Committee*
>
> A NCUC PC list serve still exists, maintained by Robin. <
> pc-ncuc at ipjustice.org>  We should create a new one alongside the others
> at lists.ncuc.org, and boot up the PC in a manner consistent with our
> extant bylaws V.  All councilors originating in NCUC; "Members...who are
> serving on GNSO Working Groups, ICANN Advisory Committees, Presidential
> committees and other policy bodies (standing or ad hoc) within the ICANN
> process [I'd interpret this to include the two NCUC reps to the NCSG PC};
> and "Any NCUC delegates to the NCSG Executive Committee (in an ex
> officio capacity)," e.g. I'd join.
>
> The PC adopts positions, replies to public comment periods, etc.  For
> issues that will go to the GNSO, the Councilors and two delegates carry the
> position into the NCSG PC for sorting out with NPOC and possible adoption
> as NCSG positions.
>
> The precise composition of the PC could be tweaked in the revision.
>
> thoughts…?
>
> since the purpose is to have NCUC more assertive regarding policy and
developing its policy positions within NCSG and with or without NPOC, the
PC has an important role, hopefully with chair having experience in term of
policy, it is quite critical to have the committee active and responsive to
public comments periods, and in particular starting the process of drafting
earlier to avid being in emergency mode and rushing for consensus . that
will help the EC to focus on its main task and in the going foundational
and institutional building. The NCUC PC can coordinate the work of  NCUC
within NCSG PC .


> *2) Constituency Day*
>
> For CD, I propose this tentative schedule
>
> 9:00-9:15 Welcome etc
>
> 9:15-9:45 Pending Elections
>
> 9:45-10:40 Policy Committee and Bylaws
>
> 10:40-11:00 Coffee
>
> 11:00-11:45 Visit of the ATRT II Team
>
> 11:45-12:30 AOB  (please advise of items to cover.  do we want to talk to
> GACers again?  I'd suggest only if we have a specific agenda, not more
> "getting to know you.")
>
> Reactions, please...
>
>
> yes for preparing for ATRT meeting, and seeing the latest discussion, we
should support our represenattive there and psuh for issues we have in mind
regarding staff influence,reconsideration process etc. maybe presenting
Milton paper (I am kidding :))
we start to have this contact with GAC and reach them, maybe we can find
another way to continue that even informally and before they got stuck in
long process of drafting communique, we can add other representative like
from EC or even  NTIA?
we can remove that from the agenda if we setup an informal meeting before
(if it is possible)

*3) Friday 15 November*
>
> I did chat informally with Olga Cavalli the possibility of us doing
> something substantive together on Friday 15 if we don't do a bylaws
> meeting.  Whoever got there in time could come.  Both sides need to decide
> if it's worth pursuing.  We were thinking something combining the South
> School of IG + NCUC might be fun, like a half day meeting off site (e.g. at
> university) geared toward civil society outreach, like what we did in
> Durban.  Anyone have any thoughts on this option?
>
> as I replied before and with your latest updates, I support such event and
I think that we wont get stuck into logistics thing but we can focus on the
progam and content (and some outreach effort)

>  I don't recall the relevant provisions but if you say so, then ok,
> either it waits to the 2014 election or we work magic with SIC.  I think
> there's no point in continuing to go back and forth debating precise
> timings ex ante, we have to get into the process, see how it develops, and
> how that works with the rest of what we have going on.
>
> I think the ongoing consensus is to start working in the bylaw,
cooperating with the staff to make the process smooth and catching the SIC
to move forward . the earlier we get their feedback , we can fix the
contentious points and find agreement
I am not sure that the SIC will keep the same members every years, need to
check.
we have some old drafts, the new setup committee will do the work of
merging them ,editing etc and tweaking where needed and discussing with
ICANN staff.  we can have update about the work at CD .

>
>
> I notice NPOC is producing policy statements being endorsed by the NCSG PC
> and we don't even have a real means to do the same.
>
>
to put things in context, NPOC produced one policy statement for something
they care about, updating their bylaw as they told us in durban . it is
legitimate concern for them. in fact, for whois and other statements it is
mostly our members doing the drafting and NCSG PC endorsing, we need to
coordinate that effort and improve it.

Rafik

> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-ec mailing list
> Ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130921/b8dadbb3/attachment.html>