RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter revision - basic principles

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Philip, my responses in CAPS below.

Thanks,
Mike

Mike Rodenbaugh
Rodenbaugh Law
548 Market Street
San Francisco, CA  94104
+1.415.738.8087
www.rodenbaugh.com

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 4:15 AM
To: 'BC gnso'
Subject: [bc-gnso] BC charter revision - basic principles

In order to shape any conference call on the Charter I wonder if members
would be kind enough to provide thoughts on the following.
 
Background
Today we have 41 members, 3 elected volunteer member officers, 3 appointed
credentials committee, and 2 nom com appointees plus a part time
secretariat.   Additionally a number of members contribute to ad hoc policy
and other task forces etc.
 
Issue 1 - the balance between doers and members What is the right balance
between the number of annually elected positions and the membership size ?
Today (and for the last 10 years) it is 3/41 = 7% Draft charter changes it
to 5/41 =12%.
The draft charter also envisages other admin committees totalling with the
elected positions 13/41 =32%.
 
What is the right balance between elected, appointed and ad hoc ? 
Are there one third of the BC willing to volunteer their time to non-policy
work?  [WE DO NOT HAVE MANY MEMBERS PARTICIPATING SUBSTANTIALLY TO ANY
BC-RELATED WORK TODAY.  THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WILL IMPROVE
ANYTIME SOON, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE DETERIORATING STATE OF BC LIST
COMMUNICATIONS, EXODUS OF LARGE MEMBERS, ETC.]
Is there sufficient motivation to be a member volunteer for mostly
non-policy work?  [IT WOULD SEEM PEOPLE WOULD BE MORE MOTIVATED TO DO POLICY
WORK, SINCE THAT IS OUR PURPOSE AS A CONSTITUENCY.  FEW ENGAGE IN THAT NOW.
WHY WOULD WE EXPECT MORE VOLUNTEERS FOR NON-POLICY WORK?]
Do members want one set of elections per year or several ?  [ONE IS PLENTY,
TURNOUT IS VERY LOW FOR MANY VOTES ALREADY.]
What does it mean if we conduct an election but less than half the members
vote?  [NOTHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT THIS...]
 
Issue 2 - balance of independence
As ICANN starts to offer more services what degree of independence do we
want as a constituency ?
Do members wish to authorise the release of their private data to enable
ICANN staff for instance in the future to run BC elections?  [NO.]
Do members wish to entrust ICANN with the funds in the BC bank account ?
[NO.]
Or should the ICANN toolbox be a basket of services that the secretariat can
choose from?  [YES, SERVICES THAT BC LEADERSHIP CAN CHOOSE FROM.]
 
Knowing how members feel on these higher level issues may help us move
forward and reach consensus on the shape of our future Charter.
 
 
Philip