ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] AWOL and the reform proposals

  • To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] AWOL and the reform proposals
  • From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 09:44:47 -0700
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Web-Based Email 4.11.10

<html><body><div>Agreed. I think there are other clarifying questions that we 
should ask as well. One I have is in regards to the selection of Councilors 
from the stakeholder groups. There are differing views as what is meant.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>One interpretation is that each of the&nbsp;stakeholder groups&nbsp;will 
individually&nbsp;select&nbsp;four Councilors from among their respective 
group. The other intrepretation is that the supplier stakeholder 
groups&nbsp;would together select eight councilors, four from each group. The 
user stakeholder groups&nbsp;would do the same. It is a subtle but important 
difference.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Of course the other possibility is that the BGC WG intended us to figure 
out how that would work.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I think any clarifying questions of this nature are necessary prior to 
forming a Council response to the report.</div>
<div><BR><BR>Tim <BR><BR></div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px 
solid" webmail="1">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE: [council] 
AWOL and the reform proposals<BR>From: "Gomes, Chuck" 
&lt;cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Fri, November 02, 2007 11:24 am<BR>To: 
"Avri Doria" &lt;avri@xxxxxxx&gt;, "Council 
GNSO"<BR>&lt;council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2>Avri,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2>I did not assume such a restrictive role for the Council 
under the proposed improvements, i.e., "<FONT face="Times New Roman" 
color=#000000 size=3> the Council only being responsible for process 
management</FONT>".&nbsp; I assumed that the Council's responsibilities would 
include policy management in a broader sense than just process management 
although I think the two areas are hard to differentiate in some cases.&nbsp; I 
fully agree with you that the policy items you identified should be the 
responsibility of the Council under the proposed model and would add to your 
examples the following: ensuring that policy development work complies with 
Bylaws restrictions defining consensus policy development (a change recommended 
in the recommendations) or, if the work does not apply as possible consensus 
policy development, making that clear to the working group in advance and 
throughout th!
 e process as needed.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2>When I made my public comments in the GNSO Improvements 
Workshop on Monday, I made them with the above assumption.&nbsp; That is why I 
thought that there would still be good motivation to participate on the 
Council.&nbsp; If in fact, the BGC WG intended the more restrictive role of the 
Council as you concluded, then&nbsp;I would have more empathy for the concern 
about attracting qualified participants to the Council.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=163160016-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
color=#0000ff size=2>It seems to me that it would be very good if you, as 
chair, seek clarification from the&nbsp;BGC WG in this regard so that we know 
whether or not there is a concern here that we should address or not.&nbsp; 
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>Chuck Gomes</FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Tahoma size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>"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." </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: 
#0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Avri 
Doria<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, November 02, 2007 10:14 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Council 
GNSO<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [council] AWOL and the reform 
proposals<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Hi, 
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>I sent the following in to the gnso-improvements list during the meeting 
on Monday.</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>a.</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>----</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">To the members of the committee:</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">First I thank the working group for its efforts and 
find myself in agreement with much of the report.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">While I agree that the GNSO Council should not be a 
legislative body, I am concerned about scope in your definition of 
"management." The report seems rather explicit in defining management solely as 
responsibility for process. I think that the notion of management needs to be 
expanded to include responsibility for Policy management.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I think the idea of the Council only being responsible 
for process management is too limited. And while I accept the arguments that 
this will make recruitment much more difficult, not only among constituencies 
and stakeholder group, but within the Nomcom process, I think that this is the 
lesser of the problems with this approach.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I support the idea of Working Groups, despite the 
challenge involved in creating working groups that are of sufficiently diverse 
and of manageable size. I think that the Council needs to remain responsible 
for the policy activities and output of the working groups. Not only do I think 
that councillors should be chosen as stewards for these Working Groups, but I 
believe that the Council should have a role in determining whether the policy 
recommendations are compatible with ICANN mission and core value and other 
policy recommendations. Beyond this there is a need to make sure that the 
various policy recommendation are not seen individually but are seen in the 
light of other policy processes and efforts. This does not mean that the 
council should be able to reject the work of a working group because it 
disagrees with the conclusions. It does mean that the council should be able to 
return policy recommendations to the working group with policy issues an!
 d concerns that it believes are not adequately dealt with.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I agree with the comment that Thomas Narten made, it 
is critical for the council to have a voice in deciding whether the policy 
recommendations of a working group are good for the Internet community. To me, 
this means that the council must retain a policy management role.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Avri</DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On 2 nov 2007, at 06.59, Philip Sheppard wrote:</DIV><BR 
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px 
solid" type="cite">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=751324513-02112007>Fellow Council 
members,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=751324513-02112007>many apologies for 
missing the meetings in LA this week but alas my duties as IPRA president 
intervened.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=751324513-02112007>And I was flying 
during our voting meeting so could not dial-in without bankrupting the 
BC.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN 
class=751324513-02112007></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=751324513-02112007>Anyway, it seems 
that some good progress was made on many issues (though I note not on the 
politically sensitive issue of IGOs). </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>GNSO 
reform</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2>The reform 
proposals pose some fundamental challenges to the heritage we guard known as 
the bottom-up process.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2>While we may differ 
in outcomes with respect to constituency boundary changes, it may be productive 
to have debate on some of the wider issues of the reform 
proposals.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2>In particular it 
would be good to know fellow Council members views on the objective that 
Council should manage the PDP but not decide (if I may 
paraphrase).</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2>This objective is 
separate to its implementation (eg work groups ) for which I see little need to 
debate as we do them anyway when we believe they are right to 
do.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2>But I am concerned 
that the objective may&nbsp;weaken Council by diminishing the incentive for 
participation.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007></SPAN><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT 
face=Arial size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial size=2>It would be good to 
learn of opinions on this.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=751324513-02112007><FONT face=Arial 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>Philip 
</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>