RE: [bc-gnso] BC call next week

["Berry Cobb" <berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Has formal notice and conference information been sent for the call yet?
Thank you.


Berry A. Cobb
Infinity Portals LLC
866.921.8891

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 02:57
To: 'BC gnso'
Subject: [bc-gnso] BC call next week


Regarding part 1 of the BC call next week we plan to start the discussion
with
some broader principles / practicalities on these points.
A few members provided personal comments already on list which has been
helpful.
If we can come to agreement on these, it will help inform some of the
broader
shaping questions raised in the new Charter.
 
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 members.
Draft charter changes it to 5/41 members.
The draft charter also envisages other admin committees totalling with the
elected positions 13/41.
Do we have one-third of the BC membership ready to step into one of these
volunteer positions? 
What is the right balance between elected, appointed and ad hoc ? 
Is there sufficient motivation to be a member volunteer for mostly
non-policy
work? 
Should we scale this back ?

Issue 2 - election sequencing and time for discussion
Is there a hierarchy of posts in the new charter for which we would want to
have
sequential elections?
Should we attempt to elect reps and exec comm all at the same time and make
them
mutually exclusive?
Or should we hold the reps election, then BC chair, then each vice chair?
If the latter what nomination / discussion / election period is practical?
If we followed one member proposal for 2 weeks of each and assume 7 separate
elections we could be conducting elections for 42 weeks!
What is the right balance?

Issue 3 - 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?
Do members wish to entrust ICANN with the funds in the BC bank account? 
Or should the ICANN toolbox be a basket of services that the exec comm can
choose from? 

Issues 4 -  other points members wish to raise.