(I have trimmed the cc's) During yesterday's teleconference of the council, I spoke up and indicated I was not happy with the solution, esp. not since it meant coming back upon an earlier compromise. Given the fact that other constituencies saw no problems, it was a lost battle to oppose it 100%. I was glad that the chair made two things very clear, when I asked: 1. Multiple reps participating in the discussion is not allowed, just giving a fact occasionally 2. If a chair of a TF allows opinions to go as facts, people can complain with the council On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, at 11:01 [=GMT-0500], Milton Mueller wrote: > Bruce and others: > > GNSO Taks Forces are not neutral, purely informational bodies. > They are intended to be representational and they are > by necessity highly political. Therefore we need simple, > clear rules regarding participation. The "one voice/constituency" > rule guarantees fairness in representation and avoids > warping the politics of the deliberations by giving one > constituency multiple voices. > > I know there are powerful people on the sidelines who > wish to inject their views into any and all task forces at > specific times. That is precisely why we need impartial > and unambiguous rules against ex parte communications. > That temptation must be resisted. It is not a good sign > that at the first bit of pressure the GNSO Council has > caved in to make the procedure less fair, > because it contrains precisely those parties that it was > designed to constrain. > > Allowing the Chair of the TF to decide who has relevant > "facts" to contribute and using discretion to permit some > alternates to speak while preventing other alternates from > speaking is simply not an acceptable policy. If the TF needs > specific facts from specific parties it can issue requests > for them in the form of email. Also, I note that the > ICANN staff was supposed to fulfill that role. > > In short, I see nothing here except an unacceptable > attempt by known parties to multiply their voices on > the task force so as to dominate the politics. This must > be rejected, and if it is not NCUC representations will > make a procedural issue out of it on the Task Forces. > > --MM > > >>> "GNSO SECRETARIAT" <[log in to unmask]> 12/19/03 03:38AM >>> > [To: dow1tf[at]gnso.icann.org > > > The GNSO Council discussed this issue during its meeting on 18 Dec 2003. > > It was recognised that alternates play a valuable role in task force > work in using their own network of contacts and resources to collect > data together for the task force. Normally alternates would provide > their work through the primary constituency representative on the task > force. It was noted however that during a particular call or physical > meeting an alternate may have some useful "factual" information to > provide that is relevant to the discussion. Note that ICANN staff > members and the GAC liaison have typically operated in that mode during > GNSO council calls. It was noted that a balance needs to be struck > between alternates offering information that might be strongly related > to a particular constituency viewpoint (e.g isolated events, anecdotal > information, or a reference to a Web blog or an academic paper > expressing a particular opinion) as opposed to factual information (e.g > a reference to an existing ICANN policy, or a reference to a previous > statistical survey, or ICANN workshop). > > The Council recommended that the chair of each task force be given the > discretion to take advantage of the availability of alternate members > for the purposes of providing factual information, whilst ensuring that > each constituency expresses their particular opinion/viewpoint on the > policy issue under consideration through a single representative during > any single call or physical meeting. If a particular constituency > believes that the intent of the motion of 20 Nov (which ensures fair > participation by all constituencies regardless of their size and > resources) is not being met, this should be raised with the chair of the > task force, through their representative on the task force. If a > consituency is unable to resolve the issue with the task force chair, > then the constituency can request guidance from the GNSO Council, > through their representatives on the GNSO Council. > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > Chair, GNSO Council > > posted by: GNSO Secretariat > > >