Dear All:<br><br>I thought this note from Denise might be of interest.<br><br>---------- Forwarded message ----------<br><span class="gmail_quote">From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Denise Michel</b> <<a href="mailto:denise.michel@icann.org">
denise.michel@icann.org</a>><br>Date: 21-Mar-2007 22:13<br>Subject: [At-Large] Public Forum on GNSO Improvements, Monday 16:00 Lisbon<br>To: <a href="mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org">alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>
<br><br></span>Dear At-Large Advisory Committee members and At-Large community members:<br><br>Your participation in the 'Public Forum on GNSO Improvements' scheduled<br>for Monday, 26 March, 16:00 - 18:00, in Lisbon is encouraged.
<br><<a href="http://icann.org/meetings/lisbon/agenda-public2-26mar07.htm">http://icann.org/meetings/lisbon/agenda-public2-26mar07.htm</a>><br><br>The Board Governance Committee (BGC) is hosting this forum to encourage
<br>additional public input and discussion on the LSE review and<br>improvements to the GNSO's structures and processes. While input on all<br>elements of the GNSO and the LSE review report are open for comment at<br>
the forum, the Committee is particularly interested in hearing your<br>views on the GNSO review recommendations listed below. (Note that<br>questions raised about the recommendations listed below are included to<br>prompt thought and discussion, and are not intended to represent the
<br>views of the BGC or its members).<br><br>*Individuals and stakeholder groups are encouraged to submit views on<br>these and other recommendations in advance of the forum to<br><<a href="mailto:gnso-improvements@icann.org">
gnso-improvements@icann.org</a>>. Authors of emailed input will be given an<br>opportunity to present their views prior to opening the forum to<br>comments from the floor.*<br><br>o Structural Changes to GNSO Constituencies -- LSE recommendation 19.
<br>Simplify the GNSO constituency structure in order to respond to rapid<br>changes in the Internet, including by substituting 3 larger constituency<br>groups representing Registration interests, Business, and Civil Society;
<br>LSE recommendation 18. Create a category of 'Associate Stakeholder' to<br>establish a pool of available external expertise.<br><br>- Which entities and individuals should participate in the GNSO process,<br>and what will motivate them to want to join? The six current groups are
<br>the natural point to begin discussion. Do they represent the right<br>groups? Are they over or under inclusive? The Bylaws acknowledge that<br>the optimal groupings may be different than the ones that now exist, and<br>
that there is no "magic number." The LSE points out several problems<br>with the current structure and suggests the substitution of three larger<br>constituencies — is this the right answer?<br><br>- Is it feasible to create a roster of readily available experts who can
<br>assist with task forces and other aspects of the PDP?<br><br>- What other questions and approaches should the BGC explore regarding<br>these two LSE recommendations?<br><br>o Changes to the Policy Development Process -- LSE recommendation 17.
<br>Make greater use of task forces [in policy development processes]; LSE<br>recommendation 23. Revise and move PDP operational provisions from<br>Bylaws to more flexible GNSO 'Rules of Procedures.'<br><br>- Could greater use of task forces, particularly proposals to attract
<br>more expertise and geographical diversity, help the policy development<br>process? Would limiting the number of Councilors on any task force<br>enable the Council to focus more on the task of managing PDPs, rather<br>
than the substantive aspects of formulating specific policies? Would<br>this change increase the number of people willing to serve on the Council?<br><br>- There seems to be widespread agreement that the Bylaws are overly
<br>prescriptive, and the prescribed PDP steps and timelines have not<br>captured the requirements of a policy development process. Should the<br>PDP principles be preserved in the Bylaws while placing more procedural<br>
elements in GNSO 'rules of procedure'? Do you have specific suggestions<br>for how the PDP should be revised?<br><br>- What other questions and approaches should the BGC explore regarding<br>these two LSE recommendations?
<br><br>o Changes to Voting and Representation -- LSE recommendation 21.<br>Increase the threshold for establishing consensus to 75% and abolish<br>weighted voting; LSE recommendation 20. Make the Council smaller (16<br>members suggested).
<br><br>- How would raising the consensus threshold and abolishing weighted<br>voting advance the role of the GNSO? The Bylaws task the GNSO with both<br>"developing and recommending" gTLD policies to the Board.
<br><br>- Weighted voting, in particular, was instituted as part of ICANN's<br>Evolution and Reform Process to address the different effect policies<br>have on contracted versus non-contracted constituencies. Has this
<br>approach contributed to, or hampered, effective policy development?<br><br>- What other questions and approaches should the BGC explore regarding<br>these two LSE recommendations?<br><br><br>(Please share this announcement with community members and other
<br>interested parties.)<br><br>Regards,<br><br>Denise Michel<br>Vice President, Policy Development<br>ICANN<br><a href="mailto:denise.michel@icann.org">denise.michel@icann.org</a><br><br>_______________________________________________
<br>ALAC mailing list<br><a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br><a href="http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org">http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
</a><br><br><a href="http://www.alac.icann.org">www.alac.icann.org</a><br><a href="http://www.icannalac.org">www.icannalac.org</a><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>-- <br>Regards,<br> <br>Nick Ashton-Hart<br>PO Box 32160<br>
London N4 2XY<br>United Kingdom<br>UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011<br>USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460<br>Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135<br>mobile: +44 (7774) 932798<br>Win IM: <a href="mailto:ashtonhart@hotmail.com">ashtonhart@hotmail.com
</a> / AIM/iSight: <a href="mailto:nashtonhart@mac.com">nashtonhart@mac.com</a> / Skype: nashtonhart<br>Online Bio: <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart">https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart</a>