[NCUC-EC] PRIORITY: Proposed Response to the GNSO Review Team Statement

[William Drake]

Hi

I know most people here are not following this debacle but you should be aware of that Westlake, the consultancy hired to conduct the GNSO Review, has been pursued a consistent and malicious agenda of attacking NCUC.  They released their first draft of the report while we were on the ground in Singapore, without any opportunity for the community Review Team to see the text, and it was loaded full of misrepresentations and falsehoods about us that required a ten page letter to debunk (shared here 3 March and attached again).  Now subsequent to our rather contentious meeting with them in Buenos Aires, Westlake has pulled the same trick again, releasing a final report without any vetting with the Review Team that is loaded with fresh attacks on us and recommends that NCSG effectively move to the CSG model of having GNSO Council seats “wired” to constituencies rather than elected by the Stakeholder Group as a whole as the Board mandated in 2011.  https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pdf>  So once again we have to spend time dealing with this distracting and divisive nonsense.

Here is the transcript from last week's consultations on the GNSO Review. As you can see, it was rather contentious.
http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-gnso-review-16sep15-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-gnso-review-16sep15-en.pdf>

Chuck Gomes of the Rgy SG has drafted a letter for the review team’s consideration questioning the last minute insertion by Westlake of Recommendation 23, which calls for wired council seats.  The RT will have another call tomorrow which you are most certainly welcome to attend,  Monday, 21 September from 16:00-17:00 UTC, Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnso-review/ <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnso-review/>.  The rush is because the Board is supposed to take up the Westlake report on 28 September.

I attach also my quickly thrown together suggested edits to Chuck’s text as NCUC’s rep on the RT.  I could not personally endorse his letter as written.

Any quick comments suggestions expressions of support etc most welcome.

Bill

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com>
> Subject: NCUC Response to the Draft GNSO Review Report
> Date: March 3, 2015 at 4:58:16 PM GMT+1
> To: "Exec. Comm" <ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org>
> 
> Hello
> 
> Attached is the final version of the document EC members have expressed support for in draft form.  I suppose for the record it would be good practice to confirm your support for the final if you have not.  It has been sent to the GNSO Review Working Group as well.  The group’s conference call is in three hours, please do join as an observer if you can.  The details were sent previously.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150920/ed138631/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: NCUC Response to Westlake GNSO Review draft 03 March 2015.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 140690 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150920/ed138631/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150920/ed138631/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Draft Points on Westlake Goverance GNSO Review Final Reportspbd.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 27180 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150920/ed138631/attachment.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150920/ed138631/attachment-0002.html>