[ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: Cross Community Working Group on Internet Governance proposed Charter

Jordan Carter jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Thu Aug 14 06:17:44 UTC 2014


Hi all

Checking in - where are we at with the charter?

Best
Jordan

On Thursday, 26 June 2014, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to point out that this number has been the case in the
> earlier version of the charter, including those that were circulated
> while I was still a member of this group.  In fact I dropped from member
> to observer in order to do my bit to help the SO meet the proposed
> numeric conditions.
>
> The larger body count with which this particular group was started was
> due to the original situation of founding this group from a NCSG-ALAC
> core.  Once some of us working on the early versions of the charter
> looked at the equivalence issues of giving each of the RALO, e.g. as
> many members as we gave each of the SGs, we decided that this would
> cause rapid enlargement of the group and possibly result in more
> imbalance between the SOs and ACs.  One of the goals of the original
> charter writers, of which I was one while still a member, was to strive
> to an approximation of SO/AC equal footing.
>
> avri
>
> On 26-Jun-14 08:03, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> > Thanks, Greg.
> >
> > As I said, I apologize for not having noted that change at the time.
> > I appreciate that point of view, but as there is much discussion within
> > the GNSO's various sub organizations about participation in CCWG's
> > overall, and the BC at least has had four participants in the initial
> > work of the CCWG IG, I am asking the CSG to consider the  present draft.
> >  I didn't feel that I could recommend endorsement of the Charter until
> > this change was understood more broadly.
> >
> > Thanks for your email, I do appreciate it, and your explanation to the
> > CCWG IG of your role in drafting the proposed change in numbers of
> > participants..
> >
> > Were you able to follow our discussion yesterday? If not, I can also
> > catch up with you off line, although I think that we have a transcript
> > at some point.
> >
> > I also really appreciate Bill Drake's making sure that the change was
> > understood.
> >
> >
> > Marilyn Cade
> > BC
> >
> >> From: GShatan at ReedSmith.com
> >> To: marilynscade at hotmail.com <javascript:;>; ocl at gih.com <javascript:;>
> >> CC: ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org <javascript:;>
> >> Subject: RE: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: Cross Community Working
> > Group on Internet Governance proposed Charter
> >> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 16:26:41 +0000
> >>
> >> Marilyn:
> >>
> >> I've gone back and looked at this again (apologies for not doing so
> > during the meeting), since I recall feeling that we had come to a place
> > that I think should be satisfactory to the GNSO. The current draft
> > charter allows each organization "a maximum of six (6) Members
> > (excluding the appointed Co-Chair)." This was actually language that I
> > had a hand in developing. With 6 members plus a Co-Chair, the GNSO would
> > have 7 seats, sufficient to allow each discrete organization within the
> > GNSO to be fully represented in a voting capacity. In addition, there
> > would be an equal number of Observers, so that at least one additional
> > member of each discrete SG/Constituency would be able to participate as
> > an Observer (I hope that's not an oxymoron). Therefore, I think that the
> > effect on participation may not be so significant.
> >>
> >> I'm not in London (sadly), but feel free to reach out to me by email
> > or phone if you would like to discuss.
> >>
> >> Greg
> >>
> >> Gregory S. Shatan
> >> Partner
> >> Reed Smith LLP
> >> 599 Lexington Avenue
> >> New York, NY 10022
> >> 212.549.0275 (Phone)
> >> 917.816.6428 (Mobile)
> >> 212.521.5450 (Fax)
> >> gshatan at reedsmith.com <javascript:;>
> >> www.reedsmith.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org <javascript:;>
> > [mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org <javascript:;>] On
> Behalf Of Marilyn
> > Cade
> >> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 9:35 AM
> >> To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
> >> Cc: ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org <javascript:;>
> >> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: Cross Community Working
> > Group on Internet Governance proposed Charter
> >>
> >> My deep apologies for being so disconnected on the item about numbers
> > of participants from various groups in regard to the Charter. I was
> > traveling extensively and thought I was keeping up with the major
> > changes about the Charter re substance, our role, etc., and frankly, I
> > missed the proposal to change the number of members that we launched the
> > CCWG IG with, so substantially. And I would have commented before if i
> > had caught that, so deep apologies.
> >>
> >> I have to withdraw my recommendation that the GNSO support the Charter
> > until the participation topic is further clarified. This is what I will
> > take back, along with Phil Corwin who was also at the working session
> > from the BC, and socialize within the BC, and with Wolf Ulrich's help
> > from ISPCP, and with Greg Shatan's engagement, take this topic up in the
> > CSG's three constituencies.
> >>
> >> I will signal that I doubt agreement of such a drastic drop in
> > participation from Constituencies in numbers.
> >>
> >> I personally find it very difficult to even think this is a good idea,
> > as the credibility of the proposals of the CCWG-IG will be based on the
> > acceptance that it was truly broad and diverse and engaging across the
> > Communities. It should not be 'represenational', but participatory, I
> > think, personally.
> >>
> >> However, I also want to note that there is a significant potential
> > impact on the future of CCWGs acceptance and support from the broad
> > communities, if there is a continued effort to so significantly restrict
> > participation. I don't think I am in support of an interpretation of a
> > CCWG being too large to make decisions, given the nature of CCWGs. If we
> > want by-in, we want broader groups of participants. I see no evidence
> > that the prior arrangement was too large to get work done, although I
> > can see that in decision making, perhaps that would be the time to ask
> > for the pool of participants from a particular Constituency to designate
> > only one lead, such as on the Charter, where we could have then assured
> > that there was a designated lead per group.
> >>
> >> Thus I am raising this this afternoon, but for now, I am not able to
> > support approving the Charter with the change in numbers, so apologies,
> > but thanks to Bill for catching that some of us did not fully appreciate
> > that change.
> >>
> >> other comments from today; I think we had a good number of positive
> > and constructive actions proposed. They also sounded like productive
> > work that will engage the members of the CCWG.
> >> BUT, they also sound like work, which brings me back to thinking about
> > resources.
> >>
> >> I know it is confusing to have a last minute question about the
> > Charter, and it is probably due to my rapid transit when I was having an
> > hour or two in between planes to try to look at the Charter and possibly
> > just not fully taking note of last minute changes.
> >>
> >> M
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> > On Jun 25, 2014, at 6:48 AM, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond"
> > <ocl at gih.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Dear Marilyn,
> >> >
> >> >> On 24/06/2014 18:18, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> >> >> I am also aware that the staff have planned a session on IG, but I
> >> >> don't think I am aware of any discussion with our CCWG IG, so we
> >> >> should be thinking about what role we are playing in terms of
> >> >> community input and guidance and how we are contributing to
> >> >> fulfilling the role the community thought needed, when this CCWG IG
> > was established.
> >> >
> >> > There was no discussion on our CCWG IG re: the Staff session -- and in
> >> > fact it was only because we asked about this session that Staff
> >> > invited me to take part.
> >> > That session would have taken place without any of us being present.
> >> >
> >> > Kind regards,
> >> >
> >> > Olivier
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> >> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org <javascript:;>
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered
> >> confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received
> > it in
> >> error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately
> > by reply
> >> e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not
> > copy it or
> >> use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other
> >> person. Thank you for your cooperation.
> >>
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we
> >> inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S.
> > Federal tax
> >> advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is
> not
> >> intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of
> (1)
> >> avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state
> >> and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to
> > another
> >> party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
> >> Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> > ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org <javascript:;>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org <javascript:;>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>


-- 
-- 
Jordan Carter
Chief Executive, InternetNZ

+64-21-442-649 | jordan at internetnz.net.nz

Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20140814/7ec3295d/attachment.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list