Hi Stephanie,
as I suggested in NCSG Policy Committee list, I think the CCWG-IG can work
on charter amendments if the council give more specifics and details about
its concerns.
As one of the co-chairs of the CWG-IG, we gave reports to the council since
Marrakesh meeting and responded to the questions. I can work with the
working members and other co-chairs on drafting the amendment and we need
time to achieve that. Having the new framework cross-community working
group, we can use that as opportunity to improve the CCWG-IG and align it
with the SO/AC expectations. For other groups within GNSO, I think we can
get support at least from Business Constituency, while we try to understand
more the contracted party concerns.
deferral is needed in order for the council to have a meaningful discussion
and also liaising with other chartering organizations. I am not aware about
precedent where a group left a joint or cross community working group in
such manner.
Best,
Rafik
2016-10-29 10:42 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin <
[log in to unmask]>:
> That is right, I fired that proposal off to our policy cttee...and I think
> we have agreement that it is premature to disengage from this. Other SGs
> may feel entirely different though. I think there is a feeling that by
> disengaging, we are limiting scope creep at ICANN. Personally, I doubt
> that. Important to stay engaged to *prevent* scope creep....
>
> But mostly, we need to talk this one around a bit.
>
> cheers Stephanie
>
> On 2016-10-28 13:44, Edward Morris wrote:
>
> Hi Ayden,
>
> Thanks for the question.
>
> I believe Stephanie has indicated that she will request a deferral on this
> motion, an action I most certainly support. We need time to speak to our
> colleagues in the Contracted Party House and Commercial Stakeholders Group,
> ascertain their concerns and level of support for the CWG-IG, and sort a
> way to move forward together. As a result of work of the CCWG squared WG
> there certainly will need to be some Charter amendments and adjustments to
> the group. That certainly is doable and I'm cautiously optimistic that
> we'll be able to fashion a way forward assuming, of course, we can find a
> minimal level of support elsewhere in the GNSO.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Ed Morris
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From*: "Ayden Férdeline" <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
> *Sent*: Friday, October 28, 2016 5:37 PM
> *To*: [log in to unmask]
> *Subject*: Fwd: Motion – Withdrawal of the GNSO as a Chartering
> Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet
> governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN
>
> Can I please ask our GNSO Councillors to outline their position on the
> attached motion? I find it rather shocking and my initial reaction is that
> I hope the motion does not pass, but perhaps you can persuade me
> otherwise... Thanks.
>
> Ayden Férdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] Motion – Withdrawal of
> the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for the Cross Community Working Group
> to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN
> Local Time: 27 October 2016 2:18 PM
> UTC Time: 27 October 2016 13:18
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: Nigel Hickson <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Dear members of the CCWG-IG,
>
> I want to share this motion that has been put forward to the next GNSO
> council meeting which will take place during the ICANN57 meeting.
>
> Best regards
>
> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
> +506 8837 7176
> Skype: carlos.raulg
> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
> Forwarded message:
>
> > From: Darcy Southwell <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: [council] Motion – Withdrawal of the GNSO as a Chartering
> > Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet
> > governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN
> > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:56:30 -0700
> >
> > Dear Councilors,
> >
> > Attached is a motion for the GNSO to withdraw as a Chartering
> > Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet
> > governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN for our November 7 Council
> > meeting.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Darcy
> >
> > __________
> >
> > Darcy Southwell | Compliance Officer
> >
> > M: +1 503-453-7305 │ Skype: darcy.enyeart
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> [log in to unmask]
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>
>
>
>
>
|
