I agree with the terms. (I made some minor language corrections and suggestions in the text below.) Jaime Wagner ISPs Representative CGI (Brazilian Internet Steering Commitee) <mailto:jaime@corp.plugin.com.br> jaime <mailto:jaime@cgi.br> @cgi.br +55(51)8126-0916 <mailto:jaime@corp.plugin.com.br> jaime@corp.plugin.com.br +55(51)3123-1701 From: owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tony Holmes Sent: segunda-feira, 24 de agosto de 2009 10:13 To: ispcp@icann.org Subject: [ispcp] COMMENT REQUIRED by end of Tuesday 25 August. Dear ISPCP members Following the support expressed to respond to the GNSO Operations Team's request for comments on a proposed revised structure for the GNSO, the following response has been produced based on comments received. The aim is to forward this to the GNSO Operations team before their conference call on Wednesday 26th August ,. If you require amendment, please respond by the end of Tuesday 25th. Thanks Tony __________________ ISP& Connectivity Providers Constituency Response to GNSO Council Operations Work Team on Proposed GNSO Structure In response to the recent request for comments on the proposal to create a new GNSO Administrative body to deal with administrative issues the ISPCP offers the following comments. The consensus view of the ISPCP Constituency is that the creation of a new Administrative body would not be in the best interest of the GNSO. At a time when the GNSO is fundamentally changing its structure and working methods with the move towards a more progressive role for working groups, its essential for GNSO to use the available resources wisely. Under these circumstances GNSO already has too much work and too few volunteers. Creating an additional stream of work would have the effect of diluting the work of volunteers even more and bring into question the whole nature of ICANN as a bottom up organization. As the number of volunteers dwindles, more and more of the work has to be undertaken by staff if the required progress is to be made. That situation would inevitably evolve from coordination and facilitation by staff to actual policy making. In addition such a move adds an additional layer of complexity, with limited reward, since the administrative work has been carried out quite adequately by staff. The ISPCP does not support the division of the GNSO in this manner.