It would be very sad if we lost the true meaning of "consumer" to large/corporate users. On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi Rosemary, > > I personally think that a CC in each of the two SGs might be a solution. > Because of the way the GNSO is set up, where Constituencies mean Nomcom > committee seats and the possibility of filling comments that the Board is > willing to read because they are from a known entity, and because any > resources from ICANn will be given to constituencies, I think forming > Constituencies is a good idea. > > As for an academic constituency, if possible you should also consult with > Rafik, as he was the one selected by the board to look at those interests. > > Posting the charters of prospective constituencies publicly, is a good > idea. The CC constituency charters have been available on the CC wiki page > for a while. > > a. > > On 28 Jun 2011, at 03:18, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > > Rosemary: > > Can you explain to me how you handle the CSG/NCSG problem? If the answer > is "CC is only applying to NCSG" I will not consider it an acceptable answer > and will oppose the formation of this constituency. > > > > I will say that in our discussions with ALAC most of the people we talked > to agreed that it made more sense to advance a consumer agenda than it did > to form a consumer constituency. > > > > --MM > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of > >> Rosemary Sinclair > >> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 9:41 PM > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Re: [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS] Results of the Chartering process > >> > >> Hi Avri > >> > >> I'm prepared to try to progress the Consumer Constituency - having > >> thought about Milton's idea from NCSG Constituency Day, I still think we > >> need to move forward with a formal constituency. I'll get on to this > >> when I'm back in Sydney next week. > >> > >> I'll go back to the doc we have in NCSG EC and pick up that process now > >> NCSG Charter has progressed. > >> > >> I have also spoken to Mary briefly about an Academic Constituency - more > >> relevant to my new role - I'll have a go at drafting the Mission ... > >> > >> One other point that came up in NCSG Constit Day - when we were chatting > >> about the difference in focus between NCUC and the proposed Consumer > >> focused Constituency...it occurred to me later that we may have a > >> communications gap because of the small number of people on the NCSG-EC > >> where proposed Charters are reviewed....perhaps we need to post proposed > >> Charters where whole of NCSG can review them...even while the NCSG EC is > >> focusing more closely on the details and the process???? > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Rosemary > >> ______________________________________ > >> From: NCSG-NCUC [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Avri > >> Doria [[log in to unmask]] > >> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 8:02 AM > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Results of the Chartering process > >> > >> At the ICANN41 meeting, in addition to the major decisions regarding the > >> new gTLD process the Board took several several decisions related to the > >> the NCSG, the NPOC and the constituency process within the GNSO. > >> > >> The specific Board resolutions: > >> > >> - NPOC Charter > >> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.5 > >> > http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.5.rationale > >> > >> NPOC charter approved by the Board: > >> http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/npoc-charter-redacted-07dec10-en.pdf > >> > >> I extend a welcome to NPOC as the first new constituency within GNSO > >> since the beginning of the GNSO. Now that the NPOC has been created > >> and according to the rules of the NCSG, each NCSG member is entitled to > >> belong to three constituencies with the NCSG, I recommend that NCSG > >> members take a look at the new constituency and see whether it is a fit > >> and consider joining our new constituency. Please note, that will all > >> constituencies must adhere to the membership rules of the NCSG, > >> Constituencies can imposes additional requirements - so membership in > >> the NPOC or NCUC is still determined by the charters and membership of > >> those constituencies. > >> > >> - NCSG Charter > >> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.6 > >> > http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.6.rationale > >> > >> Charter that was approved by the Board > >> http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/proposed-ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf > >> > >> According to our new charter, we now need to approve the new charter. I > >> will start that process as soon as possible. > >> > >> - Constituency Recognition Process > >> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.7 > >> > http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm#1.7.rationale > >> > >> Process: > >> http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/newco-recognition-process-10jan11- > >> en.pdf > >> > >> Now that a method for starting new Constituencies has been created, I > >> suggest that the various interests within NCSG look at whether they wish > >> to create any new constituencies within NCSG. While the NCSG charter > >> dictates that council seats and the NCSG chair are elected by the NCSG > >> membership at large, a lot of resources within the GNSO, such as Nomcom > >> representation and representation on the various NCSG committees. > >> > >> - The GNSO notification > >> > >> Begin forwarded message: > >> > >> From: Stéphane Van Gelder > >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> > >> Date: 24 June 2011 13:00:35 GMT+08:00 > >> To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> List" > >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> > >> Subject: [council] Adoption of GNSO charters and new GNSO constituencies > >> > >> Councillors, > >> > >> Just as an FYI, here is an extract from the transcript of today's Board > >> meeting: > >> > >>>> PETER DENGATE THRUSH: WE BEGIN WITH A CONSENT AGENDA, AND FOR THOSE > >> WHO ARE NEW TO THIS PROCESS THIS IS A THING BY WHICH A NUMBER OF REPORTS > >> AND THINGS HAVE BEEN WORKED UP THROUGH THE VARIOUS PROCESSES AND COME TO > >> THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL. > >> THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED EACH OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. > >> UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS AND HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE ANY ITEM > >> FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR PLACEMENT ON THE FULL JEANTD IF IT'S THOUGHT > >> APPROPRIATE THAT ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION IS REQUIRED ON THESE ITEMS. > >> JUST BY WAY OF EXPLANATION THEY INCLUDE APPROVAL OF MINUTES, ADOPTING > >> CHARTERS FOR THE GNSO, A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW CHARTER IN THE GNSO, > >> APPROVAL OF A CONSTITUENCY RECOGNITION PROCESS, CHANGES TO ADVISORY > >> COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS, CHANGING THE FORMULATION OF THE NOMINATING SLIDE > >> IN REGARD TO THE KEAK SLOT, MEETINGS NEXT YEAR IN LATIN AMERICA AND > >> EUROPE. AND THEN THANKING DEPARTING. AND THANKING OUR HOSTS, AND > >> THANKING YOU OUR MEETING PRAVERNTS PARTICIPANTS. > >> SO WITH THAT, I AM GOING TO MOVE FROM THE CHAIR THE ADOPTION OF THE > >> CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THAT? > >> THANK YOU, GEORGE. > >> SO THE MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA IS NOW PUT. > >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS. > >> (HANDS RAISED). > >>>> PETER DENGATE THRUSH: THANK YOU. > >> ANY OPPOSED? > >> ANY ABSTENTIONS? > >> CARRIED. > >> THANK YOU. > >> > >> The consent agenda items that are of particular relevance to the GNSO > >> were the following: > >> > >> > >> 1. From the SIC - New GNSO Constituency Recognition Process 2. From > >> the SIC - Permanent Charters of the GNSO's Commercial Stakeholders Group > >> 3. From the SIC - Permanent Charters of the GNSO's Non Commercial > >> Stakeholders Group 4. From the SIC - Proposal for a Not-for-Profit > >> Operational Concerns Constituency in the GNSO > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Stéphane > > >