Re: [council] Volunteers requested - GNSO Council liaisons

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I do not think there is a conflict of interest in being both a liaison
and an active participant.

I think the only obligation would be to be careful to not speak as the
liaison unless and until that was necessary and then to be sure the
people in the WG knew which hat was worn when.

It only becomes problematic, is someone uses their laision hat to force
a substantive postion using the authority of the council.  And I have
never seen even a glimmer of that from any liaison in the GNSO.  And
would be shocked to see it from our current crop of liaisons.  In the
IETF at one point we did have an issue with this, but it was
straightened out with guidelines on making sure that one clearly
identified what role they were speaking from.  Using phrase like
"speaking personally ... ," or "representing my SG ..."  help especially
when seaking as liaison, were that to happen, it would be "as gnso
council liaison ..."

On
> CWG on a Framework for CWG Principles (co-chair position) - volunteer: John 
> Berard (John has volunteered to stay on as the GNSO Co-Chair for this effort)

I had previously volunteered to be the liaison for this.  But with John
on the council had felt superfluous in the role and pretty much did
nothing since John took care of the reports in council meeting.  Maybe
now it makes more sense.  I do follow the group, though my attendance at
meeting has been sporadic.  I can start to pay better attendance.  I do
not think of myself as an active participant in this group though the
subject is of interest, especially in this age of multiple CWGs.

avri

On 24-Oct-14 08:17, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When James had mentioned that he wouldn’t mind liaising with the PPSAI PDP 
> WG, he also mentioned that he was actively engaged in it. I understood that 
> to be some sort of disclosure on his part.
>
> When I volunteered to liaise with the translation & transliteration of 
> contact information PDP WG, I should have probably done the same. I’m not 
> sure if there is a conflict of interest in being actively engaged with a PDP 
> WG and acting as liaison between that WG and council, or not. If so, I’d 
> appreciate a heads-up.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> One of the items of the wrap up meeting was finding volunteers for the 
>> different liaison positions that have become vacant due to people stepping 
>> down from the GNSO Council. You’ll find below a list of working groups / 
>> efforts in need of a liaison and a list of those that volunteered during the 
>> wrap up session. If there are additional volunteers for these efforts, 
>> please feel free to share your interest with the list. As a reminder, the 
>> main objective of a liaison is to be able to assist the WG should there be 
>> any issues or questions for the GNSO Council as well as being able to 
>> address any questions the GNSO Council may have in relation to the effort. 
>> Furthermore, a liaison facilitates the submission of documents and motions 
>> once the WG has completed its work.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Marika
>> Curative Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs PDP – volunteer: none to date
>> Data & Metrics for Policy Making – volunteer: none to date
>> Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP – volunteer: James Bladel
>> Translation & Transliteration PDP – volunteer: Amr Elsadr
>> Geographic Regions WG – As the effort is wrapping up, Cheryl Langdon-Orr 
>> volunteered to keep the Council up to date as she will take over the 
>> leadership for this group.
>> CWG on a Framework for CWG Principles (co-chair position) - volunteer: John 
>> Berard (John has volunteered to stay on as the GNSO Co-Chair for this effort)
>> CWG to develop a framework for the use of country and territory names as 
>> TLDs (co-chair position) – volunteer: none to date
>> GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO – volunteer: Thomas Rickert
>