My concern is with the balance of SGs inputs into the discussion. This a complex issue in which some decisions will be made. I tend to think that an equal number of participants would be important to achieve a fair result. Otherwise we may confront ourselves with a army of legal people dedicated full time to this. What do others think about a group with limited membership and parity of members? Marilia On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Matthew Shears <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > + 1 Yes, open. The CCWG bylaws work has been a useful training ground. > > On 6/24/2016 9:41 AM, James Gannon wrote: > > Yes I’d support this, plenty of us who have been working on CWG and CCWG > can move quickly on this working with councillors in a bottom up manner. > > -J > > From: NCSG-Discuss < <[log in to unmask]> > [log in to unmask]> on behalf of farzaneh badii < > [log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: farzaneh badii <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Friday 24 June 2016 at 07:24 > To: " <[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]" < > [log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Council Item for Disussion > > or perhaps call for an open group so that anyone can join? > > > > On 24 June 2016 at 08:01, Dorothy K. Gordon < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> In theory your approach would be ideal but given the deadlines would it >> be effectively possible? Perhaps Council + a few others? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "James Gannon" <[log in to unmask]> >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 6:12:30 AM >> Subject: Council Item for Disussion >> >> >> Hi All, >> As we know there are many changes coming for the role of the GNSO with >> our new accountability powers, I want to call out the following item on the >> council agenda for Helsinki >> >> * Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval to Form a Drafting Team to Develop >> an Implementation Plan for New and Additional GNSO Powers and Obligations >> under the Revised ICANN Bylaws (15 minutes) >> >> I have to say that I am concerned about this, this is a critical item for >> the GNSO and will set its strategic view and position for the next 5-7 >> years most likely, I don’t fee very comfortable with this being done in a >> potentially top down manner by council, I feel that this should be >> developed in a bottom up manner by the SGs and C’s first. >> >> >> I would be interested in others thoughts so that we can guide the PC on a >> position on this >> >> >> >> >> James >> > > > > -- > Farzaneh > > > -- > > Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project > Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org > E: [log in to unmask] | T: +44.771.247.2987 > >