Re: [council] FW: ALAC Statement on GNSO WG Guidelines

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

I could guess based on previous discussions, but 
let me get a reading direct from the ALAC.  Alan
At 17/02/2011 02:19 PM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
> What does Alac mean by "even more proactive" Alan?
>
> Stéphane
>
> Envoyé de mon iPhone4
>
> Le 17 févr. 2011 à 17:33, Alan Greenberg 
> <<mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> > I *think* I understand the rationale behind the 
> > specific wording, but I will seek clarification to make sure that I am correct.
> > I believe that the ALAC is supporting the 
> > current process, and suggesting that the GNSO 
> > be even more pro-active, specifically with the 
> > ACs which do not routinely participate. The 
> > ALAC has been active in  such WG over the last 
> > several years, but the same cannot be said for 
> > the other ACs.  History indicates that public 
> > calls for participation alone are generally not sufficient.
> > Alan
> >
> > At 17/02/2011 09:10 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
> > > If Alan can speak to this at the Council 
> > > meeting on the 24th that would be helpful.
> > > The current document (Section 2.1.1) states 
> > > that when there is a Working Group a 
> > > �Call for Volunteers� will be 
> > > circulated �as widely as possible in 
> > > order to ensure broad representation and 
> > > participation in the Working 
> > > Group.��  This includes 
> > > �Distribution of announcement to GNSO 
> > > Stakeholder groups, Constituencies and/or 
> > > other Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees.�
> > > It sounds as if the ALAC is just affirming 
> > > their support, but it would be helpful to get some clarity.
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeffrey J. Neuman
> > > Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> > >
> > >
> > > The information contained in this e-mail 
> > > message is intended only for the use of the 
> > > recipient(s) named above and may contain 
> > > confidential and/or privileged information. If 
> > > you are not the intended recipient you have 
> > > received this e-mail message in error and any 
> > > review, dissemination, distribution, or 
> > > copying of this message is strictly 
> > > prohibited. If you have received this 
> > > communication in error, please notify us 
> > > immediately and delete the original message.
> > >
> > > From: 
> > > <mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > [ mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 8:59 AM
> > > To: <mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [council] FW: ALAC Statement on GNSO WG Guidelines
> > >
> > > I'm not sure I understand the concerns regarding the involvement of the
> > > ACs. All stakeholders have been invited/permitted to be involved in GNSO
> > > policy WGs since we've been using them with or without guidelines. Is
> > > the ALAC simply encouraging that to continue, or are there specific
> > > concerns that the guidelines are lacking in that regard?
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Subject: [council] FW: ALAC Statement on GNSO WG Guidelines
> > > > From: Glen de Saint G���©ry
> > > > Date: Thu, February 17, 2011 3:26 am
> > > > To: Council GNSO
> > > >
> > > > Forwarded From: ICANN At-Large Staff
> > > >
> > > > Dear GNSO Secretariat,
> > > >
> > > > On behalf of Olivier Cr�©pin-Leblond, 
> > > Chair of the ALAC, we have the honor to 
> > > transmit to you the ALAC Statement on the GNSO WG Guidelines.
> > > >
> > > > We would appreciate if you could forward 
> > > this Statement to the GNSO Chair and 
> > > Vice-Chairs for consideration at the GNSO 
> > > Council Meeting scheduled for 24 February 2011.
> > > >
> > > > The ALAC welcomes any comments the GNSO 
> > > Council may wish to make by reply.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth 
> > > Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon,
> > > > ICANN At-Large Staff
> > > >
> > > >