<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>Liz, fellow Council
members,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>this is an excellent
start to defining the TOR.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>A few comments
to help with our discussion on 25 August 2005.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>1.
<STRONG>Call</STRONG>. I would imagine we will need at least 2 hours for the
call. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. <STRONG>A:
rationale</STRONG> - Excellent.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. <STRONG>B.
Background Documents</STRONG>: I feel a more explicit list of the actions
outstanding from the GNSO Council review is required. Maria circulated a useful
chart on this (6 June 2005).What needs to be included in the TOR (under each
relevant category) from this chart are:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- just the actions
identified but not yet completed (eg PDP timelines review)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- who is expected to
do the uncompleted actions (staff, Council, Board?)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>Without this
analysis we duplicate.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. <STRONG>C:
Operational Objectives.</STRONG> This is a useful subset of relevance to the
GNSO.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. <STRONG>D: Scope.
</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>It would be useful
to number the bullet points for ease of reference.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>6. <STRONG>D1.
Representativeness</STRONG>. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- The sub question
about constituencies being open to individuals seems irrelevant, as does the
phrase "who wishes to participate". Is a wish to participate sufficient reason
for an individual? More importantly, that does not seem to me to be a condition
for the stated representativeness of a constituency. Most constituency members
are organisations and provide representation that way. The ALAC is the home for
individual perspectives.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- additional
constituencies for more input: perhaps this should be phrased would <U>add
value</U>? There will always be unhelpful input!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005></SPAN><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT
face=Arial size=2>- barriers: does this refer to barriers to entry or internal
barriers to communication?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- ALAC, GAC: does
this point belong under representativeness of the constituencies?
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005></SPAN><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT
face=Arial size=2>- no mention of the role and effect of the nom comm
Councillors.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>7. <STRONG>D2
Authority/ Effectiveness.</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>It is difficult to
understand the distinction of these two categories when read in conjunction with
the sub-points under each category. Maybe room to remove one
category?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005></SPAN><SPAN
class=578412812-23082005><STRONG><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></STRONG></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>8.<STRONG>D2
Authority</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2> - Is it always
Council that should have implemented the outstanding GNSO Council review
items?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- fairness: this is
a challenge to define and judge. Propose deletion.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- double
voting. This should be expanded to cover questions of rationale, merit, skewed
outcomes, and anti-trust implications, </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005></SPAN><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT
face=Arial size=2><STRONG>-</STRONG> The GNSO Council bylaws DO need amending re
PDP - no need to ask the question! (this is a good example of potential
duplication).</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- I don't understand
the point about constituency structure here. Does this not duplicate
Representativeness?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>9.<STRONG> D3
Effectiveness.</STRONG> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- point two about
"benefits to all parties" seems too wide for this review - unless there is a
USD10m budget for the review!!!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- PDP - the GNSO
Council Review has already said it needs changing. Duplication
again.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- "ICANN is
satisfied". Need to define ICANN - board, staff, community? If community,
remember there will be parts of the community who are never satisfied! Also need
to define satisfied. Board disagreement may lead to Board dissatisfaction with a
policy but nevertheless the GNSO process and outcome could have been the model
of effectiveness!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>10<STRONG>.
Transparency.</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- It will be useful
to completely separate the points about participation / accountability of
affected parties and conflicts of interest.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- The GNSO Council
review already identified the website as in need of
improvement.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>11.
<STRONG>Measures</STRONG>. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- I agree this is
important but also the most challenging part of the proposal! The section is not
of course separate but actually a methodology for all the other sections.
Maybe we should seek to capture this in some way.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial size=2>- Point 4a about
defining open, fairness, bottom up will be key. Unless these items are defined
for the purpose of the review, certain of the proposed questions of the review,
will be impossible to answer objectively. Propose therefore that this should be
a point nearer the top of the TORs.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Philip</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=578412812-23082005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV></BODY></HTML>