[bc-gnso] BC Charter vote - suspended

[Mike O'Connor]

great work George.  i like this charter a lot and really appreciate  
all the work you put into crafting it.  i haven't had a chance to go  
through it with a fine-tooth comb yet, but on first read it looks like  
a great "alternative version" for us to vote on.

what do others think?

Philip, where do we stand in the process of arriving at a charter in  
time for Seoul?  sorry if i've missed the update if there has been  
one, i'm digging out from a week of Blackberry-based internet access  
and may have missed it.

mikey


On Oct 14, 2009, at 9:36 AM, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Our previously stated concerns have not been reflected,
>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00376.html
>
> and we continue to have major problems with the current draft, which
> we do not support. I will not the officers have failed to answer the
> questions previously raised about merging with the other
> constituencies and providing the "minimally marked up" version of the
> charter from months ago:
>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00536.html
>
> The past 6 months have demonstrated, to be blunt, that one can spend
> months polishing a turd, but in the end it remains one. To build a
> solid foundation, we should look elsewhere for a contract template to
> build upon. Perhaps the IP, ISP, or other constituencies have better
> charters to start from.
>
> I've gone ahead and taken the City TLD charter template:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/en/improvements/ctldc-petition-charter-redacted-01jun09.pdf
>
> and made a small number of amendments to it to make it compatible with
> the BC. I've attached that alternative charter in both PDF and .doc
> formats (it was a rush job, so there are probably still some typos and
> formatting errors in it). Kudos to Dirk for providing reasonably
> balanced and neutral language in his proposed constituency charter. I
> don't see it as the be-all and end-all, but present it as a starting
> point that folks can build upon to get to a final charter that is
> acceptable to a majority.
>
> Below is a list of all substantial changes I made relative to the
> original City TLD draft charter:
>
> ------ start of list of changes -----------
> 1.1. Changed "City Top-Level Domain Constituency" to "Commercial and
> Business Users Constituency" and CTLDC to CBUC here, and elsewhere
> throughout the document.
>
> 1.2. Copied Mission from the current BC draft. from section 2.
>
> 1.3. changed RySG to CSG and RySGRs to CSGRs, and elsewhere throughout
> the document
>
> 1.4.e. changed to reflect interest of business, instead of City TLDs
>
> 2.1.2.a. Changed the eligibility requirement from 6 months to 3 months
>
> 2.1.2.e. modified the reference to "active participation" which had
> very iffy requirements and mandates
>
> 2.2.1. added words "after consulation with members"
>
> 2.2.4.a. approval of budget by MEMBERS, not just the EC, by a vote
>
> 2.2.5.i. eliminated the reference to more than 4 nominations; no one
> should be excluded from a vote
>
> 2.3. changed from a private mailing list to the public mailing list.
>
> 2.4.1.e. changed 30 days to 10.
>
> 2.4.1.g. Added section that "EC shall explore the option of automated
> voting systems." (i.e. use of BigPulse.com or other systems available
> through the GNSO)
>
> 2.4.2.b. added the words to reiterate a "vote by members", eliminated
> "Secretary" as having a role in the budget
>
> 2.4.2.e. New section. Make available accounting records to members.
>
> 2.4.3.  changed "Appoint" to "Conduct Elections" with appropriate  
> language
>
> ****** 2.4.8  need to review this; on most issues, members should be  
> voting
> ***** 3.3.4 might need to recuse themselves, instead? Discuss further
>
> 3.1. added "annually" for clarity
>
> 4.1.2.e changed to a public mailing list
>
> 4.1.3.g changed "cityTLDs" to "ICANN"
>
> 4.2.3 changed to a public mailing list
>
> 5.1. Replace 5.1.1. with language verbatim from the existing BC  
> charter
>
> 5.1.1 changed "city top level domains" to "ICANN issues"
>
> 5.1.2 changed "organization" to "entity"; remove last section denying
> individuals as members
>
> 5.1.3.a./b/c and 5.1.4, changed "Member Organization" to "Member"
>
> **** 5.1.5. CityTLD did not have weighted voting. I've changed this to
> reflect the current BC voting, except that "small" companies are
> defined as having less than 300 employees without reference to
> revenues; alternatively, we can vote based on the number of gTLD
> domains owned by an entity, in a logarithmic scheme as previously
> discussed, e.g.
>
> 1 vote: 1-10 domains
> 2 votes: 11-100 domains
> 3 votes: 101-1,000 domains
> 4 votes: 1,001-10,000 domains
> 5 votes: 10,001-100,000 domains
> 6 votes: 100,001-1,000,000 domains
> 7 votes: more than a million domains
>
> 5.2.a. deleted references to city TLDs, and place branding
>
> 5.2.b. changed "public interest organization" to "entity"
>
> 5.2.c. Deleted, as made redundant by modified 5.2.b.
>
> 6.2.1. Changed to "more than 50%" from 2/3rds, and weighted votes.
>
> original 6.2.2. Eliminated, as weighted votes are explicitly  
> mentioned in 6.2.1.
>
> 6.2.3. Renumbered to 6.2.2.
>
> 7.1.a. redefine "Status" to be "Category Level of Membership"
>
> 7.3.2. removed entirely. This is redundant, as 7.3.1. makes it clear
> what is "appropriate" content, and by definition anything that isn't
> in 7.3.1. is inappropriate
>
> 9.1. changed "city top level domain" to "business"
> 9.1.d. eliminated this, as many of those belong to the NCUC
>
> 10.1.2.a/b/c changed "six month" to 12 month, and 1/2 to "1/3rd"
>
> 10.1.3. change them from being suspended to Observer
>
> 10.3.1. remove reference to 7.3.2, and instead refer to 7.3.1
> 10.3.4. and/or to the Ombudsman
>
> 11.1 Instead of specifying the fees, I've deleted them, and suggested
> they be voted upon by members at least once per year.
>
> 11.2. Delete reference to Secretary
>
> old 11.2.c. Delete entirely
>
> 11.2.d. Renumber to 11.2.c Changed Registry Stakeholders Group to CSG;
> deleted ccNSO
>
> 11.3. remove reference to Secretary
>
> 11.4. reiterated requirement for a vote
> ------ end of list of changes -----------
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> http://www.leap.com/
> <alternative-charter-1.pdf><alternative-charter-1.doc>

- - - - - - - - -
phone 	651-647-6109
fax  		866-280-2356
web 	www.haven2.com
handle	OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,  
Google, etc.)