RE ITEM 7 --------- ARTICLE III, Section 1 of the By-Laws reads: "ICANN and its constituent bodies shall operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open and transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure fairness". Interpreting this with the usual rules of construction, the key here is "maximum feasible". In the early days of ICANN, all meetings -- with the exception of GAC, whcih technically was not part of ICANN were open. Regrettably I am increasingly concerned that there has been a trend to declare meetings as 'CLOSED', including ccNSO related meetings In addition I have seen mere observers in some of our meetings requested to leave. For the most part, I submit, this contravenes Art III. Transparency requires that, like local government decision making, ICANN;s constituent bodies operate in the sunlight. There are some matters which justify confidentiality and excluding the public, such as (example list). - employment matters - contractual matters - any proceedings of the Ombudsman - consideration of any legal advice that would involve a risk of waiver of privilege if the meeting were not closed - any item where there has been a request to deal with it in confidence But I expect these would be the exception rather than the rule. It is self-evident that for meetings of Council, WGs etc, only members of Council, the WG &c &c are participatory, but the presumption has to be, from Art III that *ALL* meetings, including things like Council prep, Tech WG meetings etc. have to be open to observers. It's not a choice we make, as you can see, the By-Laws require it. I propose that the ccNSO sets an example to the rest of the community. I propose we adopt the Thatcher rule, which is that Council resolve to confirm that :- All meetings shall be open to observers, unless a majority vote at that meeting resolves to close the meeting due to one of the above topics being dealt with; and that the meeting shall only be closed to observers for the duration of the confidential item.