Dear Marilia, Bill,

I need some clarification here. This is a CCWG under the new terms for 
CCWG. Meaning we expect a beginning, and end and some output of the 
CCWG.  The Co-Chair for the GNSO Council is Rafik. I act as GNSO Council 
Liaison. Now, are we looking for more volunteers? Or is it expected that 
apart from Rafik and Myself there is an oficial NCSG “Rep”?

If I understand it right, under the new CWG structure what we need, in 
case the group finally decides to engage in serious policy discussions 
as we have discussed in the Council over the last few calls and 
meetings, like developing our positions for the upcoming ITU-World 
Conference on Standardisation, we would like to have more than one 
additional person. We would like to have volunteers that engage 
actively.

Of course there is also now a Board group on IG and I guess the CWG can 
engage ad inficimutm in logistical arrangements who goes to what IG 
meeting. In that case I guess that just one “Rep” would be enough.

But I may be wrong in my assumptions, and gladly accept clarifications.

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
+506 8837 7176
Skype: carlos.raulg
Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
On 2 Aug 2016, at 9:25, William Drake wrote:

> Hi
>
> Thanks Marilia for following up on this. Yes, having served as NCSG 
> rep for 2.5 years I think it’s time for someone else to step in.
>
> Perhaps just a reminder, this is the CCW that was formed at Fadi’s 
> instigation after the Nov. 2013 2013 Buenos Aires meeting.  The 
> initial mission was preparing a community input into the April 2014 
> NETmundial meeting.  After the NETmundial it evolved into being a 
> vehicle for a) organizing (with staff) the public sessions on general 
> Internet governance; b) getting reports from and providing input to 
> those staff members that represent ICANN in various international 
> settings, particularly intergovernmental organizations and processes; 
> c) serving as a sort of platform for info exchange among community 
> members interested in general IG and its implications for ICANN; and 
> d) periodically discussing to no end whether the community might ever 
> be able to collaborate on other statements or efforts like the 
> NETmundial input.
>
> The CCW-IG used to do rather frequent, semi-weekly phone calls, but 
> this has recently been scaled back.  It's home on the web with its 
> Charter etc is 
> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43984275 
> <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43984275>.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>> On Aug 2, 2016, at 12:54, Marilia Maciel <[log in to unmask]> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear colleagues
>>
>> Bill Drake, our current member on the CCWG-Internet Governance 
>> (CCWG-IG) has, unfortunately, decided to step down.  We want to thank 
>> Bill for his tireless engagement in the WG and hope that he will 
>> remain involved in its work and continue to guide our community's 
>> engagement in Internet governance work.
>>
>> We urgently need to find a replacement for Bill. We have had some 
>> expressions of interest but we welcome additional expressions of 
>> interest from the community.
>>
>> Please note that the NCSG PC will be evaluating the candidates 
>> according to the following:
>>
>> Overall engagement in NCSG policy-related work and with the community 
>> more broadly
>> Internet Governance experience (inside AND outside ICANN)
>> Experience with CCWGs.
>> Those who are interested should also state why they would like to 
>> represent NCSG's interests in the CCWG IG (2 paragraphs max).  A 
>> commitment to materially and consistently contribute to the WG and to 
>> communicating on a regular basis with NCSG as to the work of       
>> the WG is essential.
>> Timeline:
>>
>> Please send expressions of interest to the NCSG list by 23.59 UTC 
>> August 4.  A decision will be communicated to the community at the 
>> latest by 23.29 UTC Aug 8.
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Marilia, Matthew and David