Bill, You are hired as my editor! Thanks very much!! I'll get these points into the document. Best, Robin On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:12 AM, William Drake wrote: > Hi Robin, > > This is very useful, thanks for doing it. > > Don't know whether you are open to considering amendments, but in > the event you are there's a couple points you might consider > amplifying/clarifying to strengthen the argument, particularly for > outreach to folks who are not already following this closely. > > On Jul 14, 2009, at 2:04 AM, Robin Gross wrote: >> >> Board Appointed (top-down) vs. Elected (bottom-up) Represent ion >> on GNSO Council >> >> Specifically, beginning with the Seoul ICANN Meeting in October >> 2009, noncommercial users and commercial users are each supposed >> to have elected 6 representatives to the GNSO Council. However, >> as a result of back channel lobbying by the commercial >> constituencies who lost the advantage in numbers of councilors, >> the 3 new GNSO Council seats that should have gone up for election >> to noncommercial users, will instead become board appointments. > > Aside from a general sense that reps should be elected rather than > appointed, some readers might not get what the problem is here. > Might it be useful to add a sentence addressing the possibility of > non-representative reps dictated by staff/board, fragmentation of > SG cohesion, etc? Should it be noted that the appointments are > supposed to be for just the first cycle? >> >> ICANN Defies Public Comment and Imposes Stranglehold Charter Model >> >> What did ICANN do in response to the public comment it received >> and the global consensus against the stranglehold charter model >> proposed by CP80? ICANN adopted the stranglehold charter model >> for noncommercial users, defying the unanimous public support >> expressed for the charter drafted by noncommercial users that was >> created through a consensus process. > > Wouldn't it be good for this paragraph to describe precisely what > the nature of the stranglehold is with the staff version? You say > above that CP80s' would put NC "in endless competition among > factionalized constituencies, constantly fighting over scarce > resources and representation on ICANN's GNSO Council," but readers > who've not read CP80s and the staff's against each other might not > get just what you're contending the current version would do. >> >> ICANN's Sneaky Move to Keep Plans Hidden >> >> On 23 June 2009, when ICANN finally released its proposed charter >> to noncommercial users, in addition to the charter being an >> entirely different different structure than the one created by the >> consensus process, ICANN's charter also omitted to include the >> most important section 5 which deals with management of the NCSG >> and in particular, representation on the GNSO Policy Council. > > I am a little confused by this, so others may be too. Presumably > the text staff has posted for comment is the "official" version > being considered. What exactly is the status of section 5, then? >> >> Only after explicitly requesting to see the omitted section, was >> NCUC provided section 5 from ICANN with the understanding that it >> is staff's proposal for governing the NCSG. One will not find >> ICANN's proposed section 5 in its NCSG charter published on the >> ICANN website, but it can read be read here -- and it must be read >> together with the ICANN-drafted NCSG charter for it be clear what >> sneakiness is at play. > > The "it can read be read here" has a link on your blog, but in the > ascii version sent to the listservs there's no link, so readers > cannot see what you're talking about. Moreover, even if they go to > your blog and follow the link, the description of voting rules etc > might leave them unclear as to just what the problem is. Wouldn't > it make sense to quote the source and describe the problem a > little? Otherwise, asking people to "tell ICANN" etc might not > work as well. > > Just some thoughts, make of them what you will. > > Should I send it to the council list to tweak some beaks? > > Thanks > > Bill > IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]