<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>Coming back to the structural issue several times raised on this
thread:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">all
“structures” deemed to play an important role within the GNSO context – SGs,
constituencies etc. – are obliged to rely on some basic documents like charters.
I’m wondering whether charters for the houses could help them to improve since
they are a recognized entity in the decision making process. <BR><BR>Just a
question to be reviewed.<BR><BR>Wolf-Ulrich <BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=svg@milathan.com
href="mailto:svg@milathan.com">Stephane Van Gelder</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 11, 2014 10:43 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=larisa.gurnick@icann.org
href="mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org">Larisa B. Gurnick</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=marika.konings@icann.org
href="mailto:marika.konings@icann.org">Marika Konings</A> ; <A
title=michele@blacknight.com href="mailto:michele@blacknight.com">Michele Neylon
- Blacknight</A> ; <A title=jbladel@godaddy.com
href="mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com">James M. Bladel</A> ; <A title=avri@acm.org
href="mailto:avri@acm.org">Avri Doria</A> ; <A title=gnso-review-dt@icann.org
href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment
Questions</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV dir=ltr>Maybe so Larisa, but as it seems that this information is also
important to help this group best formulate its recommendations for the 360 that
the IE's work will be based on, perhaps it would be good for this group to have
that information as well, don't you think?</DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_extra>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>Stéphane Van Gelder<BR>Chairman and Managing
Director/Fondateur<BR><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: arial">Milathan LTD</SPAN>
<DIV>"Internet Intelligence - Strategic Advice"<FONT face=arial><BR></FONT><BR>T
(FR): <A style="COLOR: rgb(17,85,204)" value="+33620405589">+33 (0)6 20 40 55
89</A><BR>T (UK): <A style="COLOR: rgb(17,85,204)" value="+447583457053">+44
(0)7583 457053</A><BR>Skype: SVANGELDER<BR><A style="COLOR: rgb(17,85,204)"
href="http://www.stephanevangelder.com/" target=_blank>www.Milathan.com</A>
<DIV>----------------<BR>Discover The Milathan Post on <A
href="http://post.milathan.com"
target=_blank>http://post.milathan.com</A></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On 11 June 2014 22:24, Larisa B. Gurnick <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org"
target=_blank>larisa.gurnick@icann.org</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV lang=EN-US vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>Stephane,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>Thank
you for your comments. Please note that </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>the
research and information gathering that you are suggesting is precisely the
type of work that the Independent Examiner will engage in as part of their
review.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>Larisa</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <A
href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A> [mailto:<A
href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A>] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Stephane
Van Gelder<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 11, 2014 1:08 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
Marika Konings<BR><B>Cc:</B> Michele Neylon - Blacknight; James M. Bladel;
Avri Doria; <A href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV class=h5><BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360
Assessment Questions<U></U><U></U></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=h5>
<P class=MsoNormal><U></U><U></U> </P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Thanks Marika, very useful.<U></U><U></U></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><U></U><U></U> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>It's no surprise that there is no such provision for the
CSG, as that group delegates this sort of thing to its
constituencies.<U></U><U></U></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><U></U><U></U> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>I am however surprised that the ISP and the IPC don't have
such a provision. Is there any way of asking them just to make sure, rather
than just relying on their charters?<U></U><U></U></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR clear=all><U></U><U></U></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Stéphane Van Gelder<BR>Chairman and Managing
Director/Fondateur<BR><SPAN style='FONT-FAMILY: "Arial","sans-serif"'>Milathan
LTD</SPAN><U></U><U></U></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>"Internet Intelligence - Strategic Advice"<SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Arial","sans-serif"'><BR></SPAN><BR>T (FR): <A
href="tel:%2B33%20%280%296%2020%2040%2055%2089" target=_blank
value="+33620405589">+33 (0)6 20 40 55 89</A><BR>T (UK): <A
href="tel:%2B44%20%280%297583%20457053" target=_blank
value="+447583457053">+44 (0)7583 457053</A><BR>Skype: SVANGELDER<BR><A
href="http://www.stephanevangelder.com/" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: #1155cc">www.Milathan.com</SPAN></A><U></U><U></U></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>----------------<BR>Discover The Milathan Post on <A
href="http://post.milathan.com"
target=_blank>http://post.milathan.com</A><U></U><U></U></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><U></U><U></U> </P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>On 11 June 2014 10:10, Marika Konings <<A
href="mailto:marika.konings@icann.org"
target=_blank>marika.konings@icann.org</A>> wrote:<U></U><U></U></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Having
looked at the different SG/C charters, I have found the following provisions
that deal with membership/voting in more than one
SG/C:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>RySG
</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>(see
<A
href="http://www.gtldregistries.org/sites/gtldregistries.org/files/Charter_of_the_gTLD_Registries_Stakeholder_Group.pdf"
target=_blank>http://www.gtldregistries.org/sites/gtldregistries.org/files/Charter_of_the_gTLD_Registries_Stakeholder_Group.pdf</A>)
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"'>A Registry
that is owned or controlled by, or under common ownership with, or
affiliated with any entity that votes in another stakeholder group or
constituency in either house of the GNSO is not eligible for voting
membership in the RySG. Any question regarding eligibility or exceptions
shall be determined by a vote of the RySG.<U></U><U></U></SPAN> </LI></UL>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>RrSG
</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>(current
charter does not appear to address this issue, but it is covered in the
revised charter that is currently posted for public comment, see <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/proposed-rrsg-charter-redline-30may14-en.pdf"
target=_blank>http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/proposed-rrsg-charter-redline-30may14-en.pdf</A>)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"'>Potential
Conflicts with another Stakeholder Group (SG) </SPAN><U></U><U></U></LI></UL>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-LEFT: 30pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">If a Member serves
as a registrar with no unaffiliated third-party registrants, or is under
common ownership with an entity that in the last 12 months: has voted in
another ICANN SG or any Constituency of another SG; or holds a signed
Registry contract with ICANN that includes an exemption from the Registry
Operator Code of Conduct (Specification 9 of the 2013 standard registry
contract) that prohibits a Registry to directly or indirectly show any
preference or provide any special consideration to any registrar with
respect to operational access to registry systems and related registry
services, unless comparable opportunities to qualify for such preferences or
considerations are made available to all registrars on substantially similar
terms and subject to substantially similar conditions; then their Registered
or Non-Registered representatives shall not be eligible to hold office in
the RrSG for the Executive Committee, NomCom, or GNSO, or any other future
electable RrSG position. In addition, a Voting Member cannot have a
representative who is also a voting member or represents a voting member in
another SG. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-LEFT: 30pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Any disagreement
regarding whether an individual is eligible to hold office shall be decided
by a majority vote of the RrSG. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>NPOC
</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>(see
current charter at <A href="https://community.icann.org/display/NPOCC/Charter"
target=_blank>https://community.icann.org/display/NPOCC/Charter</A>)
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<H2 style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><U></U><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: black"><SPAN>·<SPAN
style='FONT: 7pt "Times New Roman"'>
</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><U></U><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: black'>Committee
Structure and Officer Requirements - </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: black'>2.2
Eligibility</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN></H2>
<H2 style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: black'>Sections
2.2 through 2.10 provide rules and requirements for all NPOC leadership
positions elected by the membership and, as such, apply to the Chair,
Vice-Chair, Secretariat, and Chairs of the Membership, Policy, and
Communication Committees.</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN></H2>
<DIV>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>To
be eligible for a committee officer position, candidates
must:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>2.2.1
Have been his/her organization’s representative of record, in good standing,
for a period of at least six (6) months;<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>2.2.2
Not already hold a committee leadership position;<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>2.2.3
Not be currently serving as a GNSO Council Member;
and<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>2.2.4
Not be NPOC Chair if serving on the ICANN Nominating Committee, as an officer
of another ICANN constituency or as an officer of the At-Large Advisory
Committee (ALAC).<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>NCUC</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>
(see current charter at <A href="http://www.ncuc.org/governance/bylaws"
target=_blank>http://www.ncuc.org/governance/bylaws</A>/)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"'>B.
Ineligible organizations. The membership of the NCUC specifically
excludes:<U></U><U></U></SPAN> </LI></UL>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-LEFT: 30pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>1.
Political organizations whose primary purpose is to hold government office
and/or elect government officials<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-LEFT: 30pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>2.
Commercial organizations and associations of or for the benefit of
commercial entities (even if they are non-profit in
form)<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-LEFT: 30pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>3.
Organizations that provide services under contract or MoU with ICANN, or are
represented in ICANN through another Supporting
Organization<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>
<P><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>NCSG</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>
(see current charter at <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf"
target=_blank>http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/ncsg-charter-05may11-en.pdf</A>)
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black"><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: 0.1pt">2.2.1. </SPAN><U>Ineligible <SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: 1.2pt"> </SPAN>organizations.</U><U></U><U></U></LI></UL>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-LEFT: 30pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P style="MARGIN-TOP: 3.3pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>The<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>membership<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>of<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>the<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>NCSG<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>specifically<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>excludes:</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"> <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13.9pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 39.85pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>1.
Political<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>organizations<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>whose<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>primary<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>purpose<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>is<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>to<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>hold<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>government<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>office and/or<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.4pt"> </SPAN>elect<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>government<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>officials;</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 44.15pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>2.
Commercial<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>organizations<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>and<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>associations<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>that<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>advocate<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>for<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>the<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt">benefit</SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>of<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: 1.1pt"> </SPAN>commercial<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>entities<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>(even<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>if<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>they<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>are<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>non-­-profit<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.25pt"> </SPAN>in<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -1.2pt"> </SPAN>form);</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 49.2pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>3.
Organizations<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>that<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>are<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>represented<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.2pt"> </SPAN>in<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>ICANN<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>through<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.2pt"> </SPAN>another<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>Supporting Organization<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>specified<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>in<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.2pt"> </SPAN>the<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>ICANN<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.2pt"> </SPAN>Bylaws<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>or<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.2pt"> </SPAN>GNSO<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>Stakeholder<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>Group;</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 16.75pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>4.
<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt">Organizations</SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>that<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>provide<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt">services</SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>under<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>contract<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>or<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>MoU<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>with<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.25pt"> </SPAN>ICANN;</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13.9pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 21.05pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>5.
Government<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>organizations<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>or<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>government<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>departments<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>whether<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN>local,<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>regional or<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt">national;</SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.3pt"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt">and</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13.9pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 20.3pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>6.
Intergovernmental<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt">
</SPAN>organizations<SPAN style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>whose<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>membership<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>primarily<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>includes<SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.35pt"> </SPAN>nation <SPAN
style="LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt">states.</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>
<P style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13.9pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 20.3pt"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black; LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt'>ISPCP</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black; LETTER-SPACING: -0.05pt'>
(see current charter at </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><A
href="https://community.icann.org/x/EgWpAQ"
target=_blank>https://community.icann.org/x/EgWpAQ</A>) </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"'>No specific provision
found</SPAN><U></U><U></U></LI></UL></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>IPC
</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>(see
current charter at </SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><A
href="http://www.ipconstituency.org/bylaws"
target=_blank>http://www.ipconstituency.org/bylaws</A>/)
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black">No specific provision
found<U></U><U></U></LI></UL>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="COLOR: black">BC </SPAN></B><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">(see current charter at <A
href="http://www.bizconst.org/charter.htm"
target=_blank>http://www.bizconst.org/charter.htm</A>)
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black">Membership criteria: 3.3.2 To avoid
conflicts of interest this excludes: not for profit entities excepting trade
associations representing for profit entities; entities whose prime business
is a registry, registry operator, prospective registry, registrar, reseller,
or otherwise related to domain name supply, or similar; other groups whose
interests may not be aligned with business users described in Article 3.1.
Trade associations for whom a minority of members may belong to or could
belong to any of the other ICANN constituencies are not excluded from BC
membership.<U></U><U></U> </LI></UL>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="COLOR: black">CSG</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"> (see current charter at <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/csg-charter-01nov10-en.pdf"
target=_blank>http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/csg-charter-01nov10-en.pdf</A>)
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: black">No specific provision
found<U></U><U></U></LI></UL>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Obviously I may have missed
something, so please feel free to correct or add to this information, but in
short it looks like some SG/C deal with this issue through the membership or
officer eligibility criteria while others look more specifically at who is
eligible to vote while some do not appear to have any specific provisions in
place. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Best
regards,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Marika<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>From:
</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Stephane
Van Gelder <<A href="mailto:svg@milathan.com"
target=_blank>svg@milathan.com</A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Date:
</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Tuesday
10 June 2014 23:58<BR><B>To: </B>Michele Neylon - Blacknight <<A
href="mailto:michele@blacknight.com"
target=_blank>michele@blacknight.com</A>><BR><B>Cc: </B>"James M. Bladel"
<<A href="mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com"
target=_blank>jbladel@godaddy.com</A>>, Avri Doria <<A
href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target=_blank>avri@acm.org</A>>, "<A
href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A>" <<A
href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A>><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><BR><B>Subject:
</B>Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment
Questions<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>I
don't believe this is an issue as I think all SGs in the CPH and all
constituencies in the NCPH have rules that prohibit a voting member from being
a voting member of another group in the GNSO. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Can
staff perhaps enlighten us on this?<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><BR
clear=all><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Stéphane
Van Gelder<BR>Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur<BR></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Arial","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Milathan
LTD</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>"Internet
Intelligence - Strategic Advice"</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Arial","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><BR></SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><BR>T
(FR): <A href="tel:%2B33%20%280%296%2020%2040%2055%2089" target=_blank
value="+33620405589">+33 (0)6 20 40 55 89</A><BR>T (UK): <A
href="tel:%2B44%20%280%297583%20457053" target=_blank
value="+447583457053">+44 (0)7583 457053</A><BR>Skype: SVANGELDER<BR><A
href="http://www.stephanevangelder.com/" target=_blank><SPAN
style="COLOR: #1155cc">www.Milathan.com</SPAN></A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>----------------<BR>Discover
The Milathan Post on <A href="http://post.milathan.com"
target=_blank>http://post.milathan.com</A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>On
10 June 2014 19:48, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <<A
href="mailto:michele@blacknight.com"
target=_blank>michele@blacknight.com</A>> wrote:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><BR>It's
something that probably needs to be addressed if it hasn't been
already.<BR><BR>I'd be quite disturbed if a single company was voting in
multiple places on policies etc., that benefited them<BR><BR>I don't have an
issue with companies / organisations having membership (of some kind) in
multiple groups. If, for example, we were to start selling more transit etc.,
then we'd probably want to follow the ISPs more closely. But voting is a
different matter.<BR><BR>Regards<BR><BR>Michele<BR><BR>--<BR>Mr Michele
Neylon<BR>Blacknight Solutions<BR>Hosting & Colocation, Domains<BR><A
href="http://www.blacknight.co/"
target=_blank>http://www.blacknight.co/</A><BR><A
href="http://blog.blacknight.com/"
target=_blank>http://blog.blacknight.com/</A><BR><A
href="http://www.technology.ie/"
target=_blank>http://www.technology.ie/</A><BR>Intl. <A
href="tel:%2B353%20%280%29%2059%20%209183072" target=_blank>+353 (0) 59
9183072</A><BR>Direct Dial: <A href="tel:%2B353%20%280%2959%209183090"
target=_blank>+353 (0)59 9183090</A><BR>Twitter: <A
href="http://twitter.com/mneylon"
target=_blank>http://twitter.com/mneylon</A><BR>-------------------------------<BR>Blacknight
Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
Park,Sleaty<BR>Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.:
370845<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: <A href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A> [mailto:<A
href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A>] On Behalf Of James M.
Bladel<BR>Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 6:44 PM<BR>To: Avri Doria; <A
href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'>Subject:
Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment Questions<BR><BR><BR>I
know some structures (like the RrSG) have either adopted changes to their
bylaws, or are working to, that would prohibit members from voting if they are
voting members in other SGs. But it is not clear to me how this is
enforced on a community-wide basis.<BR><BR>J.<BR><BR><BR>On 6/10/14, 12:28 ,
"Avri Doria" <<A href="mailto:avri@acm.org"
target=_blank>avri@acm.org</A>>
wrote:<BR><BR>><BR>>Hi,<BR>><BR>>I thought there was already a
rule somewhere in the SIC documents about<BR>>being able to vote in only
one SG. Of course a company with many<BR>>divisions could find a way
to be a member of several. Or could have<BR>>staff members join
multiple Constituencies or SGs as individuals.<BR>><BR>>But how would
one prevent that? Of course one way to start is the<BR>>requirement
that all SGs list all of their members on a public web site.<BR>> I think
wee already have that requirement, somewhere, but I am not<BR>>sure it is
followed by all with equal fervor.<BR>><BR>>Perhaps we should also have
a question about the degree to which the<BR>>various SGs and Cs follow SIC
rules.<BR>><BR>>avri<BR>><BR>><BR>>On 10-Jun-14 19:07, Volker
Greimann wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> One further issue the DT may want to
look at is if it is necessary to<BR>>> devise policies that avoid
"double dipping" i.e. representation of<BR>>> one entity within multiple
constituencies.<BR>>> Without such policy one could argue that there is
a risk for the<BR>>> entire structure of ICANN being hollowed out or
dominated by<BR>>> specialized interest groups that happen to fit more
than one constituency.<BR>>><BR>>> This is not necessarily a
structural, but rather an organizational<BR>>> issue, i.e. of defining
which constituency best represents an entity.<BR>>><BR>>>
Best,<BR>>><BR>>>
Volker<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> Am <A
href="tel:06.06.2014%2023" target=_blank>06.06.2014 23</A>:44, schrieb Ron
Andruff:<BR>>>> Dear Chuck, James and
all,<BR>>>><BR>>>> As I catch up on this string reading
through the posts since my last<BR>>>>one I am seeing a lot of
parsing of words rather than an<BR>>>>understanding of what
I believe Avri and I are trying to bring to<BR>>>>the
fore. What I am saying is that the structure we have
now<BR>>>>appears to be serving only two groups - Registries
and Registrars -<BR>>>>within all of ICANN. Those of us who
were not contracted parties<BR>>>>were jammed together at
an 11th hour meeting similar to how<BR>>>>Yugoslavia was
created post WWII, and we all know what happened to<BR>>>>that
mashup...<BR>>>><BR>>>> If there is commonality (and here I
take issue with your comment<BR>>>> James, re:<BR>>>> the BC
and IPC overlap, because that is NOT the case in our view) it<BR>>>>
is commonality around ICANN issues such as public interest,
user's<BR>>>> interests, as examples. Otherwise the memberships
in the various<BR>>>> bodies that make up the NPCH could not be
further from one another<BR>>>> in their interests and
actions.<BR>>>><BR>>>> So we are saying -- as members of
this WP -- the discord within the<BR>>>> NCPH is palpable. It
is not dislike of each other, rather different<BR>>>> views as
constituencies. Thus, we should give the house structure
a<BR>>>> serious review to see if there are other ways to structure
the<BR>>>> organization so that it better serves the institution and
likewise<BR>>>> the community.<BR>>>><BR>>>> While
Chuck has pointed to some results that have occurred over
the<BR>>>>years, the few positive examples pale in comparison
to all of the<BR>>>>other issues, big and small, that
have failed more often than not<BR>>>>locked in stalemates,
e.g.<BR>>>> Vertical Integration. One result of VI is new
registries<BR>>>>handpicking even trademarked names and
putting them into their own<BR>>>>registrar to sell for $1000's
as premium names... Was that the<BR>>>>intended result the
Board thought would happen when they took that<BR>>>>over
from the GNSO WG or was that just an outcome of a failure
of<BR>>>>the GNSO to fulfill its mandate...? I don't know
the answer, but I<BR>>>>do believe that things we have yet to see as
a result of VI will<BR>>>>haunt ICANN for decades to
come. Some may see this example as<BR>>>>conflating issues, but
it is not so much that as an example of what<BR>>>>happens when
the GNSO doesn't work as it could.<BR>>>><BR>>>> In my view,
we should stop parsing words with explanations and get<BR>>>> on with
a full - 360 degree - review of the entire GNSO...<BR>>>> stakeholder
groups, houses, NCAs, voting, how to manage new entrants<BR>>>>
(constituencies, communities, brands, geos)
etc.<BR>>>><BR>>>> We need new ideas to build a structure
that meets today's and<BR>>>> tomorrow's (as far as we can anticipate
them) needs. The survey<BR>>>> respondents will give us the
data to construct the 'new GNSO'. We<BR>>>> just have to figure
out how to put a survey together that asks all<BR>>>> of these
critical questions.<BR>>>><BR>>>> A fresh idea for selecting
Board members (as that discussion has<BR>>>>also come up
on this thread) is needed if we want to populate the<BR>>>>ICANN
Board with the most highly-qualified representatives. When
I<BR>>>>consider how much vetting prospective Board members go
through via<BR>>>>the Nom Com (as a result of my participation
in 2013 and again this<BR>>>>year) I am amazed and appalled at
how very little vetting those<BR>>>>Board members that come
through the SG's get...<BR>>>> Why would the community choose such an
uneven and illogical<BR>>>>methodology?<BR>>>> Given an
opportunity to utilize a better process, I am sure
the<BR>>>>community would seize on it for all the good reasons
one can<BR>>>>imagine. So what quality of Board
would we get if each<BR>>>>constituency/stakeholder group were to
put forward three candidates<BR>>>>for the Nom Com to vet and
select one from?<BR>>>> Would<BR>>>> that raise the
bar? Would such a vetting process remove from
the<BR>>>>Board those whose first interest may not be the good
of ICANN? Radical, yes.<BR>>>> Workable, maybe. Raise the
quality of the ICANN Board of
Directors,<BR>>>>absolutely...<BR>>>><BR>>>>
Everyone on this WP should be thinking outside of the box if we
hope<BR>>>>to generate a GNSO review/improvement from the
bottom up.<BR>>>>Otherwise, we will see change coming
from the top down, whether we<BR>>>>like it or not. And
then what?<BR>>>><BR>>>> Kind
regards,<BR>>>><BR>>>>
RA<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>> Ron Andruff<BR>>>>
dotSport LLC<BR>>>> <A href="http://www.lifedotsport.com"
target=_blank>www.lifedotsport.com</A><BR>>>><BR>>>>
-----Original Message-----<BR>>>> From: <A
href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A><BR>>>> [mailto:<A
href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A>]<BR>>>> On Behalf Of
Avri Doria<BR>>>> Sent: Friday, June 6, 2014 16:11<BR>>>>
Cc: <A href="mailto:ntfy-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"
target=_blank>ntfy-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</A><BR>>>> Subject: Re:
[gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment<BR>>>>
Questions<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>>
On 06-Jun-14 19:53, Gomes, Chuck
wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>>>> Can you give me an example
where the House structure has caused a<BR>>>>>> problem with
regard to policy development, which is the GNSO's<BR>>>>>>
primary role?<BR>>>>>><BR>>>>> The inability of the
NCPH to perform any of it functions without<BR>>>>> months of
garbage processing. It just does not work. We
have<BR>>>>> great trouble electing a vice-chair and we have
failed completely<BR>>>>> in electing a Board member this
time.<BR>>>><BR>>>> [Chuck Gomes] I don't think
this<BR>>>>> has impacted policy development but it is still a
very good point of<BR>>>>> an issue that needs to be dealt
with. I would like to think (maybe<BR>>>>> naively)
that this should be able to be solved within the existing<BR>>>>>
structure. If the two houses cannot resolve it among
themselves,<BR>>>>> then maybe it should be discussed by the full
Council.<BR>>>> It can't be. If anything it has gotten worse
over the three years<BR>>>> and gets worse all the
time.<BR>>>><BR>>>> And I certainly can't see discussing it
in council. What is the<BR>>>>difference between
discussing it in the house and in council. the<BR>>>>other
house is going to give us advice on how to get along.
Not<BR>>>>too likely.<BR>>>> In all my years of studying
counseling and group dynamics that has<BR>>>>never been a
workable formula.<BR>>>><BR>>>> Kind of like a one neighbor
trying to fix the marital problems of<BR>>>> their
neighbors.<BR>>>><BR>>>> And before you suggest we go to a
counselor, we did. And indeed<BR>>>>when it gets too
tough the Ombudsman can help us iron our a<BR>>>>compromise,
but that is not way to live.<BR>>>><BR>>>>>
Additionally, and I can see why the CPH would not mind, it
is<BR>>>>> obvious that the differences inside the NCPH will keep
use from<BR>>>>> ever being able to elect a Chair from our side of
the GNSO. That<BR>>>>> is a kind of dysfunction that rots
most organizations sooner or later.<BR>>>><BR>>>>
[Chuck<BR>>>>> Gomes] I think this is kind of an unfair
statement. The reality<BR>>>>> is that the NCPH did not put
forward a candidate in the last round.<BR>>>>> If you think it is
impossible, maybe the Council should explore<BR>>>>> ways to
rotate the position among the two houses. I haven't<BR>>>>>
discussed this with others in the CPH but I personally would
be<BR>>>>> fine with that as long as the candidates have good
leadership<BR>>>>> skills and are able to commit the
time.<BR>>>> Yeah maybe. But no. In fact, names withheld,
I have even have CPH<BR>>>> people tell me this that they realized
there was no way we could<BR>>>> ever put up a candidate that could
win because our vote would always<BR>>>> split.<BR>>>>
Though the idea of us putting up a candidate we agreed on is
rather<BR>>>> funny.<BR>>>> Pathetic humor, but
funny.<BR>>>><BR>>>>>> Is the adversarial problem you
observed in the Council or the GNSO<BR>>>>>> in general?
I am not on the Council so I cannot speak to that directly.<BR>>>> On
council we can actually sometime agree on some issues. We
mostly<BR>>>>all know how to behave professionally in council
most of the time.<BR>>>><BR>>>>> The Council is not
sperate form the GNSO. The dysfunction is in<BR>>>>> both on
the NCPH side.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Additionally the house
structure makes it impossible to ever<BR>>>>> consider adding new
SGs, and with the growth of the new gTLD space,<BR>>>>> that looks
like a possible limitation.<BR>>>><BR>>>> [Chuck Gomes]
Adding SGs would certainly<BR>>>>> be complicated but I don't
think it should be impossible.<BR>>>> That would imbalance the house
which would be complicated.<BR>>>> Whereas without house, we could
just add some more council members.<BR>>>>> But I am not
suggesting we add SGs at this point in
time.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> What I am arguing for is
gathering information. Maybe my<BR>>>>> perception is mine
alone. The fact that people aren't intersted in<BR>>>>>
gathering information strikes me as sort of problematic,
though.<BR>>>><BR>>>> [Chuck Gomes]<BR>>>>> As I
think I have said several times, I am not opposed to
gathering<BR>>>>> the information but just question whether we
should do it in this<BR>>>>> exercise, i.e., the
timing.<BR>>>> I do not understand the timing issue. This is
the time. next time<BR>>>> is in 3 years. There is one
survey, one chance for the SIC to find<BR>>>> out what needs to be
done.<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>>> If everything is as
wonderful as you think it is, asking the<BR>>>>> questions won't
hurt anything, we will find out that everything is<BR>>>>>
wonderful and I am wrong.<BR>>>><BR>>>> [Chuck Gomes] If the
group wants to ask<BR>>>>> questions about structure, I won't
fight. And I didn't say<BR>>>>> everything is
wonderful. Everything is far from wonderful but I am<BR>>>>>
not convinced that is largely a factor of structure.<BR>>>> There we
have a difference of opinion. I think structure is a key<BR>>>>
component to things working out well or purely, not the only
one,<BR>>>> but a critical one.<BR>>>> You either accentuate
the differences with sets of oppositions, or<BR>>>> you put together
a structure that allows many different alliances to<BR>>>> form, with
these alliance changing over time. Because of the strict<BR>>>>
diremption in the voting structure, house versus house, SG
versus<BR>>>> SG, alliances are much more difficult. When I
compare the days in<BR>>>> the council my last time, with this time,
the alliance making was<BR>>>> far more dynamic in the
past.<BR>>>><BR>>>>><BR>>>>> As I say, at
this point I am advocate gathering
info.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> But yes, I beleive we could
eliminate the houses and keep almost<BR>>>>> everything else the
same, rather simply, all we would need to do is<BR>>>>> figure out
how to elect vice chairs and Board members. But for
the<BR>>>>> NCPH it would remove a
limitation.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> As for electing the Board,
I consider it a real democracy problem<BR>>>>> that one person is
elected by 8 people, while the other is elected<BR>>>>>
by<BR>>>>> 5 people.<BR>>>><BR>>>> [Chuck Gomes]
Please translate this for me.<BR>>>><BR>>>> (: that is far
too few people for a voting population. The idea<BR>>>>that
one board seat is elected by a group of 7 voters in
one<BR>>>>instance and by<BR>>>> 13 in another is a problem
in accountability. 21 voters is small<BR>>>>enough.
I would actually like to see us take a page out of
the<BR>>>>AT-Large book and add the SG chairs to the
voting group for a bit<BR>>>>more depth.<BR>>>> But I know
that is a structural change too far. The point is
a<BR>>>>large more diverse representative voting
populations makes for<BR>>>>better democracy, aka it is
better for accountability<BR>>>><BR>>>>> Finally I think
having a homeless voteless NCA is a real limitation<BR>>>>> on the
community's influence on the GNSO.<BR>>>> BTW, I think this was
intentional on the part of the GNSO committee<BR>>>> (which i was one
but dissented from) that came up with this<BR>>>>
mishigas*.<BR>>>> They wanted to decrease the influence of the
NCAs.<BR>>>><BR>>>> [Chuck Gomes] I need
some<BR>>>>> help understanding this. BTW, the homeless,
voteless NCA is<BR>>>>> providing some excellent service for the
GNSO in leading this group<BR>>>>> and representing the GNSO with
SIC on GNSO Review. To me that is<BR>>>>> much more valuable
than any vote would be.<BR>>>> Yes I spoke of Jen's great service in
our last meeting. And she<BR>>>>could do just as well if
she had a vote. Many people do good jobs<BR>>>>in the
council without needing to give up their vote to do
so.<BR>>>>Jonathan provides great service as a neutral chair,
yet he retains<BR>>>>his vote. The two issues are not
related. The community selects<BR>>>>three people to contribute
to the decisions making. Voting is part<BR>>>>of
that.<BR>>>><BR>>>> Would it make sense for us all to give
up our votes and just manage<BR>>>> teams?<BR>>>> We would
be contributing just as much.<BR>>>><BR>>>>
avri<BR>>>><BR>>>> * yiddish word for a special kind of
craziness<BR>>>><BR>>><BR><BR><BR><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: black'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P
class=MsoNormal><U></U><U></U> </P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>