Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders?
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports. Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise). Alan At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that.
Alan, The transitional NSCG Charter had this language: "Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form." Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative. This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever. --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports. Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise). Alan At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat? Adam
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Adam, are you arguing that it is appropriate for old constituencies to get council seats, but that it is inappropriate for new constituencies to similarly get such seats? Or are you just defending the NCUC's proposed Charter to capture the NCSG that has failed to secure board approval? In the meantime, we're still waiting for the NCUC to dissolve (as repeatedly promised by Milton). Please feel free to point us to examples of such dissolution activities. --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote: From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:29 PM On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat? Adam
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
No, I asked "When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat?" Adam On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Adam,
are you arguing that it is appropriate for old constituencies to get council seats, but that it is inappropriate for new constituencies to similarly get such seats? Or are you just defending the NCUC's proposed Charter to capture the NCSG that has failed to secure board approval?
In the meantime, we're still waiting for the NCUC to dissolve (as repeatedly promised by Milton). Please feel free to point us to examples of such dissolution activities.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:29 PM
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat?
Adam
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Adam, You might want to look at http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/en/improvements/gnso-improvements-report-27... "We recommend a 19-person Council consisting of 16 elected members, four from each of four stakeholder groups..."
From the very beginning the notion in play was that Councillors would be elected. There is no harm in having an appointed placeholder for a short period of time while new constituencies are formed and approved, but thereafter that constituency should have its own elected spokesperson on the Council. There is certainly enough room on the NCSG side for additional constituencies and their elected councilors. And if more constituencies are created, we could certainly reduce the number of NCUC councilors. Ask yourself this question, how keen will any group be to go to all the effort and aggravation of creating a new constituency if there is no ROI? Why bother if you can't even send an elected representative to the table to champion your causes and to cast a vote on matters of consensus policy?
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote: From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:46 PM No, I asked "When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat?" Adam On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Adam,
are you arguing that it is appropriate for old constituencies to get council seats, but that it is inappropriate for new constituencies to similarly get such seats? Or are you just defending the NCUC's proposed Charter to capture the NCSG that has failed to secure board approval?
In the meantime, we're still waiting for the NCUC to dissolve (as repeatedly promised by Milton). Please feel free to point us to examples of such dissolution activities.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:29 PM
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat?
Adam
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Danny, let's keep the discussion focused on the topic. The NCUC *cannot* dissolve under the imposed charter. Alan At 15/10/2009 12:35 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Adam,
are you arguing that it is appropriate for old constituencies to get council seats, but that it is inappropriate for new constituencies to similarly get such seats? Or are you just defending the NCUC's proposed Charter to capture the NCSG that has failed to secure board approval?
In the meantime, we're still waiting for the NCUC to dissolve (as repeatedly promised by Milton). Please feel free to point us to examples of such dissolution activities.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:29 PM
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
When was it agreed there would be a link between new constituency and council seat?
Adam
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
We are obviously looking at different documents. The one I am looking at is pointed to by the 30 July Board meeting report (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-30jul09.htm). It is internally described as V2.0 dated 30 July 2009 and says: 8.2.3 Three Representatives Appointed by ICANN Board. The remaining three (3) GNSO Council representatives will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements, each serving two year terms, with the expectation that new Constituencies will form. What version are you looking at? Note that I am not arguing with the position that you and Beau are taking, just pointing at the documents that I can see. Alan At 15/10/2009 12:24 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Alan, see http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/en/improvements/ncsg-proposed-petition-char... section 8.4 --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:50 PM We are obviously looking at different documents. The one I am looking at is pointed to by the 30 July Board meeting report (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-30jul09.htm). It is internally described as V2.0 dated 30 July 2009 and says: 8.2.3 Three Representatives Appointed by ICANN Board. The remaining three (3) GNSO Council representatives will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements, each serving two year terms, with the expectation that new Constituencies will form. What version are you looking at? Note that I am not arguing with the position that you and Beau are taking, just pointing at the documents that I can see. Alan At 15/10/2009 12:24 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Danny, that is V1.0, five weeks prior to the version that was approved by the Board. The approved version is marked as being changed by the SIC on the date of the Board meeting. Please note I am not condoning the manner in which the final change (or changes if there are others - I have not done a compare) was made, apparently with no consultation at all and as far as I can see, not even highlighting the changes after-the-fact. There was no explicit reference to the change in the minutes of the 27 July SIC meeting. The call for applications for the three seats (http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-05aug09-en.htm) sends mixed messages. It starts off with "...and potentially serve as full GNSO Councilors for the next two years" which is in line with the V1.0 charter. It then says "The remaining 3 seats will be temporary Board appointments with the expectation that additional non-commercial Constituencies will be formed/approved and participate in filling future NCSG Council seats. The transition period will be two years." FUTURE seats implies that it is in line with the approved V2.0 charter. Given all of that, I think a case could easily be made for reconsideration. In any case, all I was pointing out was that the Board motion to appoint the three GNSO Councillors was in line with the NCSG Charter that the Board actually approved. At 15/10/2009 01:06 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
see http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/en/improvements/ncsg-proposed-petition-char... section 8.4
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:50 PM
We are obviously looking at different documents. The one I am looking at is pointed to by the 30 July Board meeting report (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-30jul09.htm). It is internally described as V2.0 dated 30 July 2009 and says:
8.2.3 Three Representatives Appointed by ICANN Board. The remaining three (3) GNSO Council representatives will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements, each serving two year terms, with the expectation that new Constituencies will form.
What version are you looking at?
Note that I am not arguing with the position that you and Beau are taking, just pointing at the documents that I can see.
Alan
At 15/10/2009 12:24 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its-representative.
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-li sts.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-li sts.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Two years to create a constituency that may or may not get direct representation? I can see why this was kept under the radar. It's nonsense. And if we're having trouble figuring this out, how's anyone outside ICANN supposed to? Sent from my iPhone On 15/10/2009, at 1:41 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Danny, that is V1.0, five weeks prior to the version that was approved by the Board.
The approved version is marked as being changed by the SIC on the date of the Board meeting.
Please note I am not condoning the manner in which the final change (or changes if there are others - I have not done a compare) was made, apparently with no consultation at all and as far as I can see, not even highlighting the changes after-the-fact. There was no explicit reference to the change in the minutes of the 27 July SIC meeting.
The call for applications for the three seats (http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-05aug09-en.htm ) sends mixed messages. It starts off with "...and potentially serve as full GNSO Councilors for the next two years" which is in line with the V1.0 charter. It then says "The remaining 3 seats will be temporary Board appointments with the expectation that additional non-commercial Constituencies will be formed/approved and participate in filling future NCSG Council seats. The transition period will be two years." FUTURE seats implies that it is in line with the approved V2.0 charter.
Given all of that, I think a case could easily be made for reconsideration.
In any case, all I was pointing out was that the Board motion to appoint the three GNSO Councillors was in line with the NCSG Charter that the Board actually approved.
At 15/10/2009 01:06 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
see http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/en/improvements/ncsg-proposed-petition-char... section 8.4
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 12:50 PM
We are obviously looking at different documents. The one I am looking at is pointed to by the 30 July Board meeting report (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-30jul09.htm). It is internally described as V2.0 dated 30 July 2009 and says:
8.2.3 Three Representatives Appointed by ICANN Board. The remaining three (3) GNSO Council representatives will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements, each serving two year terms, with the expectation that new Constituencies will form.
What version are you looking at?
Note that I am not arguing with the position that you and Beau are taking, just pointing at the documents that I can see.
Alan
At 15/10/2009 12:24 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
Alan,
The transitional NSCG Charter had this language:
"Remaining seats will be appointed by the Board as temporary placements with the expectation that new Constituencies will form."
Notice the word "temporary". We all had the reasonable expectation that "placeholder" actually meant placeholder-until-a-newly-formed-constituency-elects-its- representative.
This board action to hard-wire those seats to two year terms came totally out of left field with no community consultation whatsoever.
--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [At-Large] "placeholder" reps not placeholders? To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 11:50 AM
That is what was in the re-drafted NCSG charter and what was approved by the Board as per the 30 July and 30 September Board meeting reports.
Since I have not seen prior comments that focused on this particular issue, it could be that it was not recognized or considered. As one of the leaders of a potential new constituency, you should bring this to the Boards's attention (presumably through Rob or Denise).
Alan
At 15/10/2009 09:35 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
By the way, is it true what I heard that the three newly appointed GNSO people have now been hard-wired in to two-year terms? I don't really see a constituency model working under those circumstances. Who's going to join a constituency if they have to wait two years to be able to directly elect a representative? No consumer group I am aware of is going to want to do that..
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge- li sts.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge- li sts.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
participants (4)
-
Adam Peake -
Alan Greenberg -
Beau Brendler -
Danny Younger