Hello, Our previously stated concerns have not been reflected, http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00376.html and we continue to have major problems with the current draft, which we do not support. I will not the officers have failed to answer the questions previously raised about merging with the other constituencies and providing the "minimally marked up" version of the charter from months ago: http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00536.html The past 6 months have demonstrated, to be blunt, that one can spend months polishing a turd, but in the end it remains one. To build a solid foundation, we should look elsewhere for a contract template to build upon. Perhaps the IP, ISP, or other constituencies have better charters to start from. I've gone ahead and taken the City TLD charter template: http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/en/improvements/ctldc-petition-charter-reda... and made a small number of amendments to it to make it compatible with the BC. I've attached that alternative charter in both PDF and .doc formats (it was a rush job, so there are probably still some typos and formatting errors in it). Kudos to Dirk for providing reasonably balanced and neutral language in his proposed constituency charter. I don't see it as the be-all and end-all, but present it as a starting point that folks can build upon to get to a final charter that is acceptable to a majority. Below is a list of all substantial changes I made relative to the original City TLD draft charter: ------ start of list of changes ----------- 1.1. Changed "City Top-Level Domain Constituency" to "Commercial and Business Users Constituency" and CTLDC to CBUC here, and elsewhere throughout the document. 1.2. Copied Mission from the current BC draft. from section 2. 1.3. changed RySG to CSG and RySGRs to CSGRs, and elsewhere throughout the document 1.4.e. changed to reflect interest of business, instead of City TLDs 2.1.2.a. Changed the eligibility requirement from 6 months to 3 months 2.1.2.e. modified the reference to "active participation" which had very iffy requirements and mandates 2.2.1. added words "after consulation with members" 2.2.4.a. approval of budget by MEMBERS, not just the EC, by a vote 2.2.5.i. eliminated the reference to more than 4 nominations; no one should be excluded from a vote 2.3. changed from a private mailing list to the public mailing list. 2.4.1.e. changed 30 days to 10. 2.4.1.g. Added section that "EC shall explore the option of automated voting systems." (i.e. use of BigPulse.com or other systems available through the GNSO) 2.4.2.b. added the words to reiterate a "vote by members", eliminated "Secretary" as having a role in the budget 2.4.2.e. New section. Make available accounting records to members. 2.4.3. changed "Appoint" to "Conduct Elections" with appropriate language ****** 2.4.8 need to review this; on most issues, members should be voting ***** 3.3.4 might need to recuse themselves, instead? Discuss further 3.1. added "annually" for clarity 4.1.2.e changed to a public mailing list 4.1.3.g changed "cityTLDs" to "ICANN" 4.2.3 changed to a public mailing list 5.1. Replace 5.1.1. with language verbatim from the existing BC charter 5.1.1 changed "city top level domains" to "ICANN issues" 5.1.2 changed "organization" to "entity"; remove last section denying individuals as members 5.1.3.a./b/c and 5.1.4, changed "Member Organization" to "Member" **** 5.1.5. CityTLD did not have weighted voting. I've changed this to reflect the current BC voting, except that "small" companies are defined as having less than 300 employees without reference to revenues; alternatively, we can vote based on the number of gTLD domains owned by an entity, in a logarithmic scheme as previously discussed, e.g. 1 vote: 1-10 domains 2 votes: 11-100 domains 3 votes: 101-1,000 domains 4 votes: 1,001-10,000 domains 5 votes: 10,001-100,000 domains 6 votes: 100,001-1,000,000 domains 7 votes: more than a million domains 5.2.a. deleted references to city TLDs, and place branding 5.2.b. changed "public interest organization" to "entity" 5.2.c. Deleted, as made redundant by modified 5.2.b. 6.2.1. Changed to "more than 50%" from 2/3rds, and weighted votes. original 6.2.2. Eliminated, as weighted votes are explicitly mentioned in 6.2.1. 6.2.3. Renumbered to 6.2.2. 7.1.a. redefine "Status" to be "Category Level of Membership" 7.3.2. removed entirely. This is redundant, as 7.3.1. makes it clear what is "appropriate" content, and by definition anything that isn't in 7.3.1. is inappropriate 9.1. changed "city top level domain" to "business" 9.1.d. eliminated this, as many of those belong to the NCUC 10.1.2.a/b/c changed "six month" to 12 month, and 1/2 to "1/3rd" 10.1.3. change them from being suspended to Observer 10.3.1. remove reference to 7.3.2, and instead refer to 7.3.1 10.3.4. and/or to the Ombudsman 11.1 Instead of specifying the fees, I've deleted them, and suggested they be voted upon by members at least once per year. 11.2. Delete reference to Secretary old 11.2.c. Delete entirely 11.2.d. Renumber to 11.2.c Changed Registry Stakeholders Group to CSG; deleted ccNSO 11.3. remove reference to Secretary 11.4. reiterated requirement for a vote ------ end of list of changes ----------- Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/