[Gnso-epdp-team] [Ext] Re: Confirming objections to recommendation #16 - geographic basis

Ayden Férdeline icann at ferdeline.com
Wed Feb 20 12:15:51 UTC 2019


While I think this is a partly matter of interpretation, and I can understand why staff have listed the CSG's Constituencies in this manner given that table, I do think it gives the impression to the casual reader that the BC and IPC are equivalent to, say, the ALAC, GAC, SSAC, or the GNSO's SGs. And if readers are being left with a false impression we should correct that. Our charter states that, "GNSO Members are appointed by GNSO Stakeholder Groups," so in line with that statement, I support Milton's wording here for Recommendation 16.

We can always over complicate this, because if we are relying so heavily on the groupings in that table, we will need to extract it in its entirety into the report for each recommendation in order to show the number of members each 'group' has relative to others, and do some calculations to re-balance the six CPH members against the 12 NCPH members so to respect the GNSO Council bicameral structure, but Milton's wording is clear and concise and  helps us avoid going down that path.

Best wishes,

Ayden Férdeline

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Wednesday, February 20, 2019 12:34 PM, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:

> Milton, please note that the reference here to ‘group’ was not intended to refer to stakeholder group but to ‘group’ as used in the EPDP Team Charter, more specifically the table on page 12-13.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Caitlin, Berry and Marika
>
> From: "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 at 22:11
> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> Cc: "gnso-epdp-team at icann.org" <gnso-epdp-team at icann.org>
> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Confirming objections to recommendation #16 - geographic basis
>
> Marika and Caitlin
>
> Another reminder that the relevant groups from the GNSO are Stakeholder Groups, not constituencies. IPC and BC are two thirds of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, they are not each of them the equivalent of RySG, RrSG or NCSG, ALAC, GAC or SSAC.
>
> The correct way for you to list the groups not supporting Rec 16 would be:
>
> ALAC
>
> SSAC
>
> 2/3 of CSG (IPC and BC)
>
> Please correct this mistake going forward.
>
> Milton L Mueller
>
> Professor, School of Public Policy
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> On Feb 19, 2019, at 12:26, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear EPDP Team,
>>
>> Per today’s meeting, the staff support team has currently noted the following groups as not supporting recommendation #16 (“The EPDP Team recommends that Registrars and Registry Operators are permitted to differentiate between registrants on a geographic basis, but are not obligated to do so.”):
>>
>> - ALAC
>> - SSAC
>> - IPC
>> - BC
>>
>> If your group is missing, or your group’s position has changed as a result of today’s discussion, please let us know as soon as possible so this can be accurately documented in the Final Report in relation to this recommendation, as well as factored into the consensus designation process.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Caitlin, Berry and Marika
>>
>> Marika Konings
>>
>> Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>>
>> Email: marika.konings at icann.org
>>
>> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
>>
>> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our [interactive courses](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=5DXgId95wrCsHi--pxTiJD7bMB9r-T5ytCn7od3CF2Q&s=Cg5uQf0yAfw-qlFZ0WNBfsLmmtBNUiH0SuI6Vg-gXBQ&e=) and visiting the [GNSO Newcomer pages](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=5DXgId95wrCsHi--pxTiJD7bMB9r-T5ytCn7od3CF2Q&s=tT-E2RoAucUb3pfL9zmlbRdq1sytaEf765KOEkBVCjk&e=).
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
>> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20190220/589eeeec/attachment.html>


More information about the Gnso-epdp-team mailing list