Dear Bill:

>
> Interesting parallel: I asked Rob in a GNSO council meeting, and  
> reiterated in my submission to the public comment period, that  
> statements made in support of the NCUC version by NCUC members and  
> hundreds (counting the Internet Governance Caucus etc) of external  
> supporters in the public comment period ending 15 April be taken  
> into account in the summary of the PC ending 23 July.  The reasons  
> for doing so were straightforward: there was no reason to believe  
> that the organizations and individuals that said they supported the  
> NCUC model and therefore rejected the opposite model had changed  
> their positions,  so they should not be required to all mobilize and  
> restate their stances a couple months later, in the summer travel  
> season (although some did).  The suggestion was not acted upon or  
> even mentioned in the staff summary.


We need to write a letter to the Chairman of the Board and all the  
Board Members explaining:

a. NCUC proposal & the support it got (signatures orgs + individuals +  
coalitions).
b. Explain why we consider there were not a bottom up approach (and  
how we get ignore it).
c. Would be nice to analyzed the ICANN's last proposal and attached  
comments to it.

We do not need to ask for more signatures. We need to attached those  
signatures we already collect and enforce what we already request. I  
am pretty sure that many board members are not aware of our NCUC  
process to get consensus on documents. how the NCUC proposal were  
discussed in different mailing lists, nor how NGOs get their consensus  
through their own organizations structures/memberships/coalitions, etc.

My two cents. Unfortunately, I am not able to help right now as I am  
very busy. But Cedric Laurant has volunteer to write the letter if  
NCUC Steering Committee agree on this.

Best,

Katitza