I agree with Mary that you shouldn't tag the agenda to something as narrow as SIGs. The NCSG charter progress is the key issue, and the Consumer constituency and IGs within NCSG can be covered within that framework.

From: Non-Commercial User Constituency [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2010 7:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] [ncsg-policy] NCSG mtg with the ICANN Board.

While I agree that the consumer interest group (and broader relationship with the proposed consumers constituency) issue is important to us and should be discussed, I think the discussion should take place within the broader context of "where, when and how the Board sees the progress towards a final charter going".

In addition, we could (if time permits) engage the Board in other issues of some importance to our group and the non-commercial community, e.g. ensuring adequate representation on each of the AoC Review Teams and the difficulties/need for support (financial and staff) for even more outreach activities.

Cheers
Mary

Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584


>>>
From:

Alex Gakuru <[log in to unmask]>

To:

<[log in to unmask]>

Date:

3/6/2010 7:16 AM

Subject:

Re: [ncsg-policy] NCSG mtg with the ICANN Board.

I agree - just the consumer agenda from me.

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:09 PM, William Drake
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> why not try to really draw them out on whether our interest group approach is really definitely ok and we can proceed, and if so the relevance to consumer etc
>
> On Mar 6, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The Board has confirmed that they will meet with the NCSG during our Tuesday meeting from 11:15 - 12:15.
>>
>> They have asked whether we have any specific agenda items we can send them beforehand.
>>
>> Suggestions?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> a.
>>
>