[ALAC] URGENT: Proposed ALAC statement on the NCSG Charter(s)

[Brendler, Beau]

I think Adam is on-target here:

"Let's go through the NCUC
proposal and say where each of us have problems and then we can
either seek the facilitated discussion that was promised. Or perhaps
better, a few of us start a discussion with Mary Wong, Bill Drake,
Robin Gross etc and work through things ourselves."

I have spoken separately to Robin and Brendan and others and they know their charter's not perfect, but I think they are genuinely looking for help in improving it. I am of course willing to help out with going through it and making suggestions.

Per Adam's comment to staff, I know that Heidi and Nick have been trying to do outreach to consumer groups, at least on behalf of the consumer constituency if not one of the charters...which is much appreciated.
________________________________________
From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adam Peake [ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 9:16 AM
To: Alan Greenberg
Cc: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: Re: [ALAC] URGENT: Proposed ALAC statement on the NCSG  Charter(s)

Alan: thanks for sending a comment
<http://forum.icann.org/lists/sg-petitions-charters/msg00025.html>. I
think it's fair, appreciate your efforts on all our behalf.

There's a lot to respond to in quite a few messages, busy day today
and tomorrow likely worse, sorry I haven't time. So just this:


>Beau, as I understand it, the Board will accept or reject presumably
>based on the their own perspective and the input received from the
>public comments. The only opportunity for change is if the Board
>rejects. If they accept, it is (until a change is required or
>forced) cast in concrete.


I suspect you are right, but this is something to check.

If I am reading the commercial stakeholder's charter correctly
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/commercial-sg-transitional-charter-28feb09.pdf>
(btw: no mention of individuals, and we know some of the
constituencies give individuals no rights other than to observe),
then it is not complete, the last item there states "The Final
Charter Process The process to develop a Final Charter shall consider
a number of additional matters." What's going on here? Doesn't this
indicate there's an opportunity to do more work?

Two things:  if the process is open to further comment --I hope it
is-- then seeking to make modifications to the non-commercial
proposals would be a good option. I suggest we only address the NCUC
proposal, the other has little support. If the process is closed as
you suggest, as ALAC can provide advice to the board as it wishes,
can't we anyway suggest whatever we think best?  In both situations
we can say there should be a further review process and specify areas
of the NCUC proposal that need to be resolved.

If we can take this route of extra comment, then let's be specific
with our questions to the NCUC (example: verification of individuals,
potential for capture by individuals... I know there's much more, but
this is pretty specific and addressable.)  Let's go through the NCUC
proposal and say where each of us have problems and then we can
either seek the facilitated discussion that was promised. Or perhaps
better, a few of us start a discussion with Mary Wong, Bill Drake,
Robin Gross etc and work through things ourselves.

And ICANN has to begin supporting the outreach. It's unrealistic to
think the NCUC alone could find members from "educational, research,
and philanthropic organizations, foundations, think tanks, members of
academia, individual registrant groups and other noncommercial
organizations etc".  It's managed a few, but some of these are groups
ICANN itself has had great difficulty engaging with. I know some NCUC
members have tried, I've done a bit myself with no luck.  Outreach of
this kind needs ICANN's support.

Thanks,

Adam



>Alan
>
>At 15/04/2009 07:26 PM, Brendler, Beau wrote:
>>I feel like I have something of a conflict of interest, since I
>>have a constituency proposal before the community for consumers. I
>>can go as far as to say I have some concerns with both charters
>>that I hope will be ironed out during the public comment and review
>>process.
>>
>>________________________________________


_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

***
Scanned

**
This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.