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]
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.
>>
>