While I agree that the consumer interest group (and broader relationship with the proposed consumers constituency) issue is important to us and should be discussed, I think the discussion should take place within the broader context of "where, when and how the Board sees the progress towards a final charter going". In addition, we could (if time permits) engage the Board in other issues of some importance to our group and the non-commercial community, e.g. ensuring adequate representation on each of the AoC Review Teams and the difficulties/need for support (financial and staff) for even more outreach activities. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: [log in to unmask] Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 >>> From: Alex Gakuru <[log in to unmask]> To:<[log in to unmask]> Date: 3/6/2010 7:16 AM Subject: Re: [ncsg-policy] NCSG mtg with the ICANN Board. I agree - just the consumer agenda from me. On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:09 PM, William Drake <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > why not try to really draw them out on whether our interest group approach is really definitely ok and we can proceed, and if so the relevance to consumer etc > > On Mar 6, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>The Board has confirmed that they will meet with the NCSG during our Tuesday meeting from 11:15 - 12:15. >> >>They have asked whether we have any specific agenda items we can send them beforehand. >> >>Suggestions? >> >>thanks >> >>a. >> >