Alain,
There is a middle case as well: when NPOC issues a position purportedly to
represent all NPOC members as a collective group, to policy/political
entities outside of ICANN.
Of course I, as an NCUC member, quite often engage independently in
communications of a policy nature. But I do not make reference to NCUC
when I do so, and NCUC has not (to my knowledge) collectively engaged in
policy matters outside ICANN, other than outreach efforts (we had a
petition regarding gTLD policy in 2007, and a call for public comment --
but the public comment appeal was within the protocols of ICANN's public
outreach, itself -- directing people to ICANN's comment system even if they
were not affiliated with NCUC or any other ICANN policy advisory body).
If NPOC is doing this (submitting comments to US government) *as a
collective, in the name of NPOC*, and not just as individual NPOC members
doing this on their own with no reference to NPOC per se, then that would
be unprecedented within NCUC and now NCSG, so far as I know.
Not just business as usual.
Best,
Dan
--
Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do
not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.
At 11:14 AM -0500 12/18/11, Alain Berranger wrote:
>Hi McTim,
>
>Thanks. You are right that working within the ICANN structure is the
>desirable and probably most effective policy influencing strategy.
>
>NPOC is committed to working within the ICANN structure.
>
>NPOC members are free to also work outside the ICANN structure if they
>wish - the effectiveness of doing that is for them to judge... and they
>may have domestic reasons (in the case of our US based members) to do so.
>NPOC has to intention to muzzle any of its members. Diversity of
>membership and policy positions is welcome at NPOC.
>
>Granted, and in a full spirit of transparency, we had a little
>coordination and timing snafu about our member's testimony and felt it
>necessary thereafter to submit a written NPOC statement.
>
>We support every NPOC member and all our NPOC members to express their
>views about ICANN the way they wish.
>
>Best, Alain
>
>On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 2:34 PM, McTim
><<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>On 12/12/11, Amber Sterling
><<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi Joy,
>>
>> The NPOC is currently drafting the written testimony to be submitted to the
>> US Senate.
>
>Why on earth would you do that? The way to affect policy is to work
>WITHIN ICANN structures, not try to subvert the entire policy making
>system.
>
>As Rocky suggested, his committee has no say in the matter, so I would
>suggest you are just tilting at windmills with your written testimony.
> In addition, this attempted "end-run" suggests that NPOC is not
>committed to working within the ICANN structure.
>
>
>--
>Cheers,
>
>McTim
>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
>route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We must submit by the end of the day on Wednesday, December
>> 14th. We will forward the written testimony to the NCSG-discuss list when
>> it is ready.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Amber
>>
>> Amber Sterling
>> Senior Intellectual Property Specialist
>> Association of American Medical Colleges
>>
>> From: NCSG-Discuss
>>[mailto:<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]]
>>On Behalf Of Joy
>> Liddicoat
>> Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 3:12 AM
>> To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] New GTLDs: Upcoming GNSO Council Meeting
>>
>>
>> Hi all - as you know the next GNSO Council meeting will be next week. The
>> Chair has asked for an update on the Senate hearings on gTLDs that are
>> currently taking place <link?> I've just noticed that some NCSG members were
>> invited by the Committee to make submissions
>>
>><http://forum.icann.org/lists/npoc-voice/msg00064.html>http://forum.icann.org/lists/npoc-voice/msg00064.html
>>and will do so
>> tomorrow:
>><http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/12/06/ymca-testimony-senate-hearing>http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/12/06/ymca-testimony-senate-hearing
>>
>> As GNSO councillors representing this SG, we would appreciate knowing
>> (before the GNSO meeting) if any others are also making submissions and, if
>> so, what those submissions are. If there are any particular issues you want
>> to be raised or for any of us Councillors to be aware of, please let us
>> know.
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>>
>>
>> Joy Liddicoat
>> Project Coordinator
>> Internet Rights are Human Rights
>
>> <http://www.apc.org>www.apc.org<<http://www.apc.org>http://www.apc.org>
>
>> Tel: <tel:%2B64%2021%20263%202753>+64 21 263 2753
>> Skype id: joy.liddicoat
>> Yahoo id: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>Member, Board of Directors,
>CECI, <http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>http://www.ceci.ca
>
>Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
><http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>www.schulich.yorku.ca
>NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation,
><http://www.chasquinet.org>www.chasquinet.org
>interim Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, <http://npoc.org/>http://npoc.org/
>O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>Skype: alain.berranger
|
