Perhaps suggest the embodiment and application of Freedom of Information principles all round? On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Alex Gakuru <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Great statement! > > Many community members also feel discouraged from participating in > lengthy and quite involving policy processes where the final output is > not shown to them or is secretly moulded or submitted to the Board. A > staff's upper hand and final say scenario is bad for the community > and the Board and can only be interpreted as only good for themselves. > > regards, > > Alex > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> Below is first draft joint NCSG-ALAC statement on the need for transparency >> of the Secret Board Briefings. >> The stmt isn't something that we would release or publish this week. >> However, Avri and I may meet with ALAC this afternoon to discuss this >> draft. So please send any comments on this draft so we can bring those into >> this mtg today in a few hours. We will have a revised draft after the mtg. >> Thank you. >> Robin >> ------- >> For many meetings now, the topic of Staff Briefing to the Board and >> Transparency has been on the table. >> While understanding that there indeed some briefings that should remain >> confidential between the Board and the Staff especially those within its >> fiduciary capacities and those encumbered by personal privacy consideration, >> there are also many issues that require transparency. >> Within the categories that require transparency there are two separate types >> of issue. >> The first type are briefings that concern an Advisory Committee or a >> Supporting Organization. In the case of this type of briefing, it is not >> appropriate for the Staff to be making unverified claims about and AC or SO >> without the knowledge of that AC and SO. Without AC or SO verification of >> the contents of a briefing, the Board is left making its evaluation based on >> rumor and may make decisions based on erroneous information. >> The second type of briefing are those that concern the policy work for which >> the SOs are responsible and on which the ACs must advise. For the Board to >> be making policy decision based on information that has not been reviewed by >> the community constitutes gaming of the bottom up policy process and gives >> one member of the community, the paid staff and undue advantage over the >> other participants in the community. >> We request that the Board change its policy so that the briefing of the >> types discussed above be made available to the correct audience; the first >> type being made available to the SO or AC in question and the second type be >> made available to the community. >> After the policy has been received we request that recent briefings that >> have contributed to various decisions also be released. >> >> >> 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] >> >> >> >