[council] GNSO Council Restructuring - a wrinkle in the two houses approach

[Tim Ruiz]

> Can you provide an example of a new constituency 
> for the contract parties house  (that is not a 
> splinter group) ?

Sure. The ISPs could open discussion with ICANN expressing their
interest to be bound to them directly through contract. They would agree
to a minimum set of standards by which they could become or continue to
operate as an ISP. They would also agree to be regulated through the
consensus policy process of the ICANN community. And they would agree to
pay certain and substantial fees based on transactions, or revenue, or
number subscribers, etc.

Then the ISPs could move to the contracted party house. Any other group
not yet a constituency could do the same thing.

Tim 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Council Restructuring - a wrinkle in the
two houses approach
From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard at aim.be>
Date: Mon, December 08, 2008 9:32 am
To: "'Council GNSO'" <council at gnso.icann.org>

Chuck, thanks for your first thoughts on this.
My concern about "GNSO flexibility" as you put it  is that the
flexibility at present is 100% in the users house!
There is zero flexibility in the contract parties house.
 
In other words its contract parties (a fixed two constituency group) 
and the rest of the world in the users house.
 
This fits poorly to the "birds of a feather" concept and the idea of new
constituencies.
The relationships between users and the three types i mentioned are a
direct parallel to the contract parties.
 
Can you provide an example of a new constituency for the contract
parties house  (that is not a splinter group) ?
 
Philip