Hi Avri and everyone

Some thoughts for discussion

Cheers

Rosemary

Rosemary Sinclair
Managing Director, ATUG
Chairman, INTUG
T: +61 2 94958901  F: +61 2 94193889
M: +61 413734490 
Email: [log in to unmask]
Skype: rasinclair
 
Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information
www.atug.com.au 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Non-Commercial User Constituency
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Saturday, 1 May 2010 2:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Reminder: Members review of Draft Proposed NCSG Charter

Hi,

Thanks for the review and the issue.

I am not sure how it would be best to handle this as there are two
conflicting ways of looking at:

- an organization should not be represented twice in ICANN and certainly
should not have two representations in the GNSO.

- on the other hand some organizations are stakeholders in several
categories at once.

In discussions during the restructuring, there was some discussion on
this topic, and if I remember correctly one thought was that an
organization could be an observer in more then SG group or SO, but had
to be a member in only one.  I do not think this was formalized.  It
certainly is not represented in this charter.  One idea would be to add
something like:

An organization which is a member of another GNSO Stakeholder Group or
Supporting Organization may request Observer status in the NCSG.  Such a
request would be acted on by the Executive Committee. An observer in the
NCSG could participate in discussions and in Interest-Groups, but would
not have a vote or any other decision making participation and its
members could not serve in NCSG leadership positions unless they became
Individual members under the criteria described in section 2.2.5.

Opinions?

Thanks again.

a.


On 30 Apr 2010, at 22:51, Andrew A. Adams wrote:

> 
> Avri,
> 
> Thanks for the reminder to read this through. Under section 2.2.2
Ineligible 
> organizations, I have a concern.
> 
> 2.2.2. Ineligible organizations.
> ...
> 3. Organizations that ..., or are represented in ICANN through another

> Supporting Organization;
> ...
> 
> I'm concerned about the overlap cases betweeen NCSG and other groups.
While 
> these groups should be relatively distinct, there will always be
boundary 
> cases of organizations who could be deemed to fall within the remit of
two 
> groups. While being a member of two groups should not be allowed, I do
think 
> there is a potential difficulty where a group falls between two SGs
and 
> neither is willing to accept them because of such rules. Could some
"weasel 
> wording" help here to indicate that organizations need to select the
"most 
> appropriate" SG to represent their interests, should they be eligible
for 
> membership of multiple SGs. There's also the issue of NCSG possibly
being 
> whittled away by other SGs (who may have less firm charter membership
rules) 
> gradually subsuming edge areas of NCSG.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Profesor Andrew A Adams       [log in to unmask]
> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and
> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan
> 
>