Philip, I'm disappointed that you decided not to call me as I requested, which would take this dispute off the list. Instead, you chose to send yet another hostile email thinly cloaked in polite salutations. Apparently, you had hoped there was a draft that no one was sharing with you per the earlier imagined conspiracy theory. Now the latest tactic is to remind everyone that you drafted the interim charter and to emphasize that "nothing has happened." It's ironic since one of the most controversial provisions you attempted to add to the last BC charter was language designed to prevent certain members from continually criticizing others (including you at the time) with hostile postings on the BC list. The topic of amending the CSG charter was first scheduled to be discussed at the Brussels meeting in order to get initial feedback and guidance from all three of the constituency memberships. I presented on this topic at our joint House meeting and then the CSG reps and some but not all of the councilors met afterward to walk through the Charter and plan next steps. Based on the feedback from the members, it was clear that everyone wanted to take the interim charter (which basically says almost nothing) and update it with a light hand to make it a high level document. Because the CSG Charter would leave all substantive decisionmaking to each Consituency, the drafting process would be easy and noncontroversial. The CSG did not get together to work on a draft and obviously fell behind schedule, but they were also busy dealing on prior calls with getting our nominees on the SSR task forces and all the drama that followed. No one acted in bad faith or with any ill intent. I don't believe that any other constituency is very concerned about the delay or is even discussing this issue because they know it will be a relatively easy process to draft an update. Because of the delay, I had decided to do a first draft of the Charter update later this week and circulate to the CSG reps and any others on our drafting team in advance of the DC meeting. As I mentioned before, the drafting session in DC is not a "drafting plenary" session but will be open for anyone who wants to attend. In the meantime, if you are sincerely interested in working constructively with me and others on this project, please call me to discuss. Sarah Sarah B. Deutsch Vice President & Associate General Counsel Verizon Communications Phone: 703-351-3044 Fax: 703-351-3670 -----Original Message----- From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 3:59 AM To: 'bc - GNSO list' Subject: [bc-gnso] CSG charter Sarah, thanks for the clarification when you wrote: "the actual drafting process will begin at the DC meeting" So I believe I understand where we are on this. 1. In 2009, Tony Holmes , J Scott Evans and myself acted as the CSG executive committee and drafted the CSG interim Charter. This was then adopted by each constituency and approved by the Board in July 2009. 2. CSG Charter article 8.2 states - "create a consensus process for a Final CSG Charter (the "Final Charter") for adoption no later than three months prior to the commencement of the 2010 annual ICANN meeting" This means we told the Board the CSG final charter adoption process would start 6 September 2010. The intent was that the drafting process would precede the adoption process. 3. The CSG liaison who replaced me on the CSG executive committee was elected by the BC on 5 February 2010.The completion of the CSG final Charter was the number one priority for the CSG liaison. 4. Nothing happened between February and June 2010. 5. In Brussels - 21-25 June 2010 - there was a meeting of the CSG executive committee. 6. Since then nothing has happened. Is this correct ? I have two requests. a) May I and Ron see the notes of the CSG executive committee meeting in Brussels please so we may get a flavour of what was discussed. b) Please explain what you believe you may achieve in the October 12 DC BC members drafting plenary. Philip