RE: [council] Regarding working group membership

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce,

Your suggested approach seems to be on a sound track.  We need to
maintain a balance of openness and effectiveness.  In that regard, we
may want to consider some means of dealing with non-constructive
behavior both for observers and members.  I am not saying that because
of any problems I have seen in recent task forces and working groups
because I haven't.  It may be that the chairs of task forces and working
groups can successfully manage non-constructive behavior; in fact, I
would suggest that that is where it should start.  But if any such
behavior continues after requests for change, there may need to be means
of removing members or observers.  I don't think it would be too hard to
build in checks and balances so that people are not unfairly removed.

Chuck Gomes
 
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 5:06 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Regarding working group membership
> 
> Hello Ross,
> 
> > 
> > Until such time that the constituencies can provide the 
> diversity of 
> > input that our processes require, we should seriously consider 
> > implementing a temporary framework that would allow for greater 
> > participation in the working groups and task forces without 
> the high 
> > bar that qualifying as an expert (or creating a new constituency) 
> > requires in situations where a stakeholder has applied for 
> membership 
> > in a constituency, but does not qualify due to the narrow 
> > qualification criteria employed by a constituency.
> 
> I have had the opportunity to discuss this idea with a few 
> people in Marina Del Ray (but unfortunately didn't get time 
> for a wider discussion with the whole group).
> 
> I note that with the new gTLD committee we have supported the 
> participation of observers in the physical meetings including 
> listening
> to their views on issues.   
> 
> I therefore recommend the following:
> 
> "Observers: Observers shall not be members of or entitled to 
> vote on the working group, but otherwise shall be entitled to 
> participate on equal
> footing with members of the working group.   In particular observers
> will be able to join the mailing list, and attend 
> teleconferences or physical meetings."
> 
> To guard against some of the behaviour that can occur with 
> unregulated mailing lists, observers must provide their real 
> name, organisation (if associated with an organisation) and 
> contact details to the GNSO secretariat, and the GNSO 
> secretariat will verify at least their email
> address and phone contact information.   Observers will also be
> requested to provide a public statement of interest, as for 
> working group members.
> 
> Where a person joins an already established working group, 
> this will be on the basis that it is their responsibility to 
> read the existing documents, listen to teleconference 
> recordings, and read the mailing list discussions before 
> commenting on topics that have already been dealt with by the 
> working group.
> 
> Note that staff should still encourage participants to join 
> one of the established GNSO constituencies where the observer 
> appears to meet the criteria for membership.
> 
> Please let me know if you have any issues or changes to make 
> on this suggestion over the next 7 days, otherwise I will 
> direct staff to allow observers.  This will be fairly 
> consistent with how we have handled liaisons in the past. 
> 
>  E.g From the ICANN bylaws:
> 
> "There may also be two liaisons to the GNSO Council, one 
> appointed by each of the Governmental Advisory Committee and 
> the At-Large Advisory Committee from time to time, who shall 
> not be members of or entitled to vote on the GNSO Council, 
> but otherwise shall be entitled to participate on equal 
> footing with members of the GNSO Council. "
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> 
> 
> 
>