At 5:02 PM +0100 1/20/13, William Drake wrote:
>Second, we've reached agreement in the EC and EPT (uh oh, new acronyms
>comingŠ.sorry) on establishing a new ncuc members listserv (double sorry).
> As you probably know, from 2003 - 2010 the present listserv was
><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask], then
>with the formation of NCSG and NPOC it became NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS@ and
>finally [log in to unmask]  Many folks thought we should have a single
>listserv to discuss GNSO/ICANN matters and that there wasn't a need for a
>NCUC-specific list.  However, when NCUC people did need to communicate
>with each other (as in this message) there's been nowhere else to do it,
>and some NPOC folks have objected to constituency-related traffic on the
>shared list.  Fair enough, and now that we're hoping NCUC will be getting
>more active on intra-organizational matters, there's really no getting
>around having a separate list, as NPOC does.  So in the next few weeks
>we'll be setting this up, and will be back to you about the details of the
>transition.


Curious as to whether we will continue to keep this list open to public
observation (my default assumption is yes).  I haven't checked recently,
but does NPOC keep their "internal" communications private to members only?
Is there any reason for NCUC to do something similar, as long as NCSG
remains public?  Is it time for NCUC to operate "in a back room" or do we
all feel comfortable operating completely in public where anyone can view
our internal deliberations?  What is the proper role of transparency in the
ICANN policy-making hierarchy?  (And actually, is NPOC violating any
transparency rules if it indeed carries on policy deliberations that are
not open to  public observation?)

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.