I see your points .. I think it first started by the chartering organizations of the cross community working group, then (trying to find a venue for GAC input) adding the GAC, then gathering all into a bigger shape representing 'Other interested parties' to make sure it covers all who are interested .. Personally I'm flexible for any more accurate, representative and inclusive way of reflecting this .. Kind Regards --Manal From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 5:01 PM To: Milton L Mueller; internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensusproposal.. I am fine with that, but we should not cherry pick among members of the ICG... On 9/15/2014 9:58 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: Before we get into a game of listing dozens of specific organizations, I would suggest broader categories, such as "users" or "commercial and noncommercial users" etc. I don't think it's appropriate to include the name of specific trade associations in that list. --MM From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff I think that this is helpful.. Please include ICC-BASIS in other interested parties...