Bruce, Your suggested approach seems to be on a sound track. We need to maintain a balance of openness and effectiveness. In that regard, we may want to consider some means of dealing with non-constructive behavior both for observers and members. I am not saying that because of any problems I have seen in recent task forces and working groups because I haven't. It may be that the chairs of task forces and working groups can successfully manage non-constructive behavior; in fact, I would suggest that that is where it should start. But if any such behavior continues after requests for change, there may need to be means of removing members or observers. I don't think it would be too hard to build in checks and balances so that people are not unfairly removed. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 5:06 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Regarding working group membership
Hello Ross,
Until such time that the constituencies can provide the
diversity of
input that our processes require, we should seriously consider implementing a temporary framework that would allow for greater participation in the working groups and task forces without the high bar that qualifying as an expert (or creating a new constituency) requires in situations where a stakeholder has applied for membership in a constituency, but does not qualify due to the narrow qualification criteria employed by a constituency.
I have had the opportunity to discuss this idea with a few people in Marina Del Ray (but unfortunately didn't get time for a wider discussion with the whole group).
I note that with the new gTLD committee we have supported the participation of observers in the physical meetings including listening to their views on issues.
I therefore recommend the following:
"Observers: Observers shall not be members of or entitled to vote on the working group, but otherwise shall be entitled to participate on equal footing with members of the working group. In particular observers will be able to join the mailing list, and attend teleconferences or physical meetings."
To guard against some of the behaviour that can occur with unregulated mailing lists, observers must provide their real name, organisation (if associated with an organisation) and contact details to the GNSO secretariat, and the GNSO secretariat will verify at least their email address and phone contact information. Observers will also be requested to provide a public statement of interest, as for working group members.
Where a person joins an already established working group, this will be on the basis that it is their responsibility to read the existing documents, listen to teleconference recordings, and read the mailing list discussions before commenting on topics that have already been dealt with by the working group.
Note that staff should still encourage participants to join one of the established GNSO constituencies where the observer appears to meet the criteria for membership.
Please let me know if you have any issues or changes to make on this suggestion over the next 7 days, otherwise I will direct staff to allow observers. This will be fairly consistent with how we have handled liaisons in the past.
E.g From the ICANN bylaws:
"There may also be two liaisons to the GNSO Council, one appointed by each of the Governmental Advisory Committee and the At-Large Advisory Committee from time to time, who shall not be members of or entitled to vote on the GNSO Council, but otherwise shall be entitled to participate on equal footing with members of the GNSO Council. "
Regards, Bruce Tonkin