Hi Stephanie, as I suggested in NCSG Policy Committee list, I think the CCWG-IG can work on charter amendments if the council give more specifics and details about its concerns. As one of the co-chairs of the CWG-IG, we gave reports to the council since Marrakesh meeting and responded to the questions. I can work with the working members and other co-chairs on drafting the amendment and we need time to achieve that. Having the new framework cross-community working group, we can use that as opportunity to improve the CCWG-IG and align it with the SO/AC expectations. For other groups within GNSO, I think we can get support at least from Business Constituency, while we try to understand more the contracted party concerns. deferral is needed in order for the council to have a meaningful discussion and also liaising with other chartering organizations. I am not aware about precedent where a group left a joint or cross community working group in such manner. Best, Rafik 2016-10-29 10:42 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin < [log in to unmask]>: > That is right, I fired that proposal off to our policy cttee...and I think > we have agreement that it is premature to disengage from this. Other SGs > may feel entirely different though. I think there is a feeling that by > disengaging, we are limiting scope creep at ICANN. Personally, I doubt > that. Important to stay engaged to *prevent* scope creep.... > > But mostly, we need to talk this one around a bit. > > cheers Stephanie > > On 2016-10-28 13:44, Edward Morris wrote: > > Hi Ayden, > > Thanks for the question. > > I believe Stephanie has indicated that she will request a deferral on this > motion, an action I most certainly support. We need time to speak to our > colleagues in the Contracted Party House and Commercial Stakeholders Group, > ascertain their concerns and level of support for the CWG-IG, and sort a > way to move forward together. As a result of work of the CCWG squared WG > there certainly will need to be some Charter amendments and adjustments to > the group. That certainly is doable and I'm cautiously optimistic that > we'll be able to fashion a way forward assuming, of course, we can find a > minimal level of support elsewhere in the GNSO. > > Kind Regards, > > Ed Morris > > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From*: "Ayden Férdeline" <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]> > *Sent*: Friday, October 28, 2016 5:37 PM > *To*: [log in to unmask] > *Subject*: Fwd: Motion – Withdrawal of the GNSO as a Chartering > Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet > governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN > > Can I please ask our GNSO Councillors to outline their position on the > attached motion? I find it rather shocking and my initial reaction is that > I hope the motion does not pass, but perhaps you can persuade me > otherwise... Thanks. > > Ayden Férdeline > linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline> > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] Motion – Withdrawal of > the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for the Cross Community Working Group > to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN > Local Time: 27 October 2016 2:18 PM > UTC Time: 27 October 2016 13:18 > From: [log in to unmask] > To: Nigel Hickson <[log in to unmask]> > <[log in to unmask]> > > Dear members of the CCWG-IG, > > I want to share this motion that has been put forward to the next GNSO > council meeting which will take place during the ICANN57 meeting. > > Best regards > > Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez > +506 8837 7176 > Skype: carlos.raulg > Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) > Forwarded message: > > > From: Darcy Southwell <[log in to unmask]> > <[log in to unmask]> > > To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > <[log in to unmask]> > > Subject: [council] Motion – Withdrawal of the GNSO as a Chartering > > Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet > > governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN > > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:56:30 -0700 > > > > Dear Councilors, > > > > Attached is a motion for the GNSO to withdraw as a Chartering > > Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet > > governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN for our November 7 Council > > meeting. > > > > Best, > > > > Darcy > > > > __________ > > > > Darcy Southwell | Compliance Officer > > > > M: +1 503-453-7305 │ Skype: darcy.enyeart > > _______________________________________________ > ccwg-internet-governance mailing list > [log in to unmask] > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance > > > > >