On Mar 8, 2017, at 20:16, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I would rephrase part of it as follows:

KK+MM: "As you know, specific PICs were accepted into the New gTLD Agreements. Some of these PICs contradict and even set aside GNSO policy processes and consensus policies. How can we ensure that PICs do not move ICANN policy outside of its narrow mission and does not override or ignore consensus processes (and the many hours of volunteer effort, time, research, drafting, editing and reviewing spent creating it)?”

Milton’s reframing is well balanced and could elicit a useful probing conversation with the Board.

On Mar 8, 2017, at 23:48, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

if you ask for a second Board member for the NCPH the first option would be to give one to the CSG and one to the NCSG. Is this the plan?

This is the sort of question one would think we’d talk through internally before getting into it with the Board. Like Sam I would drop the 4th question since Tapani anyway said he’d only added it to fill out the slate, and we now have 3 others that are meaty enough to fill the time.

************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
University of Zurich, Switzerland
[log in to unmask] (direct), [log in to unmask] (lists),
www.williamdrake.org
************************************************