Chuck and all,

 

You mentioned in the yesterday call that the number of members per group wouldn’t matter since no formal vote will be used for decision making. I’m afraid I don’t agree since the consensus (used for decision making) will be affected by the number of member per group. Suppose we are 5 ALAC members with 7 GNSO members on a WG where there are only ALAC and GNSO as chartering organizations (total WG members=12). When we have to decide by consensus, the chair can feel there is a consensus if 7 GNSO members agree and 4 or 3 ALAC members disagree. But if there are as many members from ALAC as from GNSO, the consensus will be different.

The only case where the number doesn’t matter is a decision by full consensus.

 

Nevertheless, I agree with you insisting on avoiding any vote to make a decision by the CWG.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)

Phone:  + 216 41 649 605

Mobile: + 216 98 330 114

Fax:       + 216 70 853 376

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Chuck,

 

Would the following better address your concerns:

 

In appointing their members, the chartering organizations should note that the CWG’s decision-making methodologies require that CWG members act by consensus, and that polling will only be used in rare instances and with the recognition that such polls do not constitute votes.  

 

 

 

 

Thanks Stephanie.  The minor edits looks okay to me.

 

With regard to the sentence you crafted below, I personally prefer it if we directly include a description of what we want them to see rather than making a reference to because I suspect that some people will not take the time to go to the reference.  If we do it as you suggest, I suggest we specifically refer to the section in the charter that contains what we want them to review.   What do others think?

 

Chuck

 

 

Added the following to language regarding Membership criteria:

 

In appointing members the CWG, the chartering organizations should note the CWG’s decision-making methodologies with respect to consensus calls and polling.

 

Have made a few other minor edits throughout reflected in the attached, which I believe are non-substantive/reflective of previous group discussion.

Stephanie

 

 

I am also comfortable with this wording.  Thanks Chuck.

 

 

Hi Chuck,