Hi, It is not a staff proposal. It is a proposal which i was part of initiating for how to respond to: > > Board resoluion 2008-12-11-02 > > "that members of the GNSO community work with members of the ALAC/At- > Large community and representatives of potential new "non-commercial" > constituencies to jointly develop a recommendation for the composition > and organizational structure of a Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group > that does not duplicate the ALAC and its supporting structures, yet > ensures that the gTLD interests of individual Internet users" As I indicated in my note to the council on this: > > Note: One possible objection is that this discussion is relevant > only to the NCSG and not to the rest of the GNSO community and thus > there is no role for the rest of the GNSO community or for the GNSO > council in this process. I can certainly see the logic of his > view and accept it if it is the predominant view in the council. I > do, however, feel obliged to make sure we have responded to the > Board motion, and hence the proposal and the discussion. I look forward to council discussion on this to determine the right course of action for resolving the issues contained in the Board's motion and for responding to the Board's motion. I expect that the NCUC council members will give a strong indication of the NCUC's preferences in this matter. As for being on the NCUC list. As someone who is at the same time an academic and a member of several organizations that are NCUC members but not an NCUC member per se, I read the list but do not generally respond unless directly 'addressed'. I am grateful I am allowed to read the list as email as opposed to having to go to the archive. As for my reelection; while I do very much appreciate the enthusiastic support of NCUC council members and their nomination for my first two terms, just as I very much appreciate having been nominated by members of the RrC for the most recent election, I try to do the job as openly and fairly as I can without moderating my views based on who nominated me. That does not mean I don't blow it from time to time, but when I do it is because I got it wrong and not because X or Y supported my nomination. a. On 13 Jan 2009, at 12:14, Milton L Mueller wrote: > So, Avri has replied privately indicating that she is not the author > of this proposal, it is a staff proposal and (here she needs to > speak for herself) she believes that the structure of a NCSG may > indeed be NC stakeholders' business and not the GNSO's business, so > this is not as bad as I thought it was. However, we do need to take > up with ICANN Staff exactly what they are trying to do. It's very > dangerous and counter productive for staff to pit different GNSO > factions and constituent groups against each other and very naive > (at best) for them to invite commercial constituencies to play a > role in defining the governance structure of noncommercial > constituencies. > > My apologies to Avri and please don't let my mistake (often it is > hard to follow all this stuff accurately) divert anyone's attention > from the seriousness of this issue.