Re: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

i'm with David on this one.  His sentence seems like what we need,  
instead of all the prose;

	"When a member is representing the BC, they should remain faithful to  
approved BC positions"

end of story.

mikey


On Oct 27, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Fares, David wrote:

> Colleagues,
>
> I am still working through the Charter.  Regarding solidarity  
> though, I suggest that we rephrase the language to ensure that when  
> a member is representing the BC that they are faithful to approved  
> BC positions..  I am not sure that we need the more in-depth language.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
> From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On  
> Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:54 PM
> To: 'Deutsch, Sarah B'; 'Marilyn Cade'; 'Philip Sheppard'; 'bc -  
> GNSO list'
> Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
>
> I would like to propose some alternative language in regards the  
> following:
>
> 7.5. Solidarity
> Whenever a member speaks publicly within or to the ICANN community  
> meetings and indicates to others that they are a Constituency  
> member, it is likely that their view, statement or conduct may be  
> interpreted by the ICANN community to be a Constituency approved  
> position.  As such, members are expected, when communicating on such  
> occasions to ensure that their statement(s) and conduct do not  
> undermine, prejudice or detract from an approved Constituency  
> position(s).  This will not affect a member’s right to communicate  
> their own view, if distinct from an approved Constituency  
> position(s) by clarifying that such a statement may differ from and  
> does not reflect the approved Constituency position.  Members of the  
> Executive Committee are required to support approved constituency  
> positions at all times. Both Members and Executive Committee Members  
> may communicate dissent to a Constituency position providing they  
> make it clear they are communicating in their personal capacity.
>
>
>
> 10. Privacy of personal data
> The Executive Committee, Secretariat, committees and members of the  
> Constituency will ensure privacy of member’s and/or their  
> representatives’ personal or personally identifiable data, and in  
> particular shall not deal with such data in a manner beyond what is  
> necessary for the purposes for which it was originally collected.   
> Members may also decide to make such additional aspects of their  
> data available for disclosure and may consent to any such disclosure  
> by waiving such privacy requirements.
>
> [Maybe we could list/identify what sort of data we are targeting  
> even if don’t necessarily put it into the draft it may help with  
> explaining to all us members what we mean.]
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Zahid Jamil
> Barrister-at-law
> Jamil & Jamil
> Barristers-at-law
> 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
> Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
> Cell: +923008238230
> Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
> Fax: +92 21 5655026
> www.jamilandjamil.com
>
> Notice / Disclaimer
> This message contains confidential information and its contents are  
> being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not  
> the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or  
> copy this e-mail.  Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if  
> you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your  
> system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property  
> of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged  
> information protected by attorney client privilege. The  
> reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind  
> whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing  
> it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or  
> incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior  
> written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
>
> From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On  
> Behalf Of Deutsch, Sarah B
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 2:43 AM
> To: Marilyn Cade; Philip Sheppard; bc - GNSO list
> Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
>
> I concur that the idea of a one year term should be given serious  
> consideration.  The IPC has followed this model and it works well.
>
> I see that the overly broad "solidarity" language still remains in  
> the draft.  Despite suggestions to try to figure how how more  
> accurately the language to situations where members are speaking  
> publicly to the ICANN community, the language remains unchanged.    
> As Marilyn notes correctly below, instead of drafting solidarity  
> language that actually explains what the problem is and how to  
> implement it in a narrow manner, the draft goes in the opposite  
> direction by allowing executive committee members a carve out from  
> BC positions when they speak in their personal capacity.  If anyone  
> has an obligation to adhere to the "solidarity" principle without  
> the opportunity to give mixed messages publicly or privately, it  
> should be executive committee members.
>
> Finally, I note that the troubling privacy language remains in the  
> draft unchanged.  No one has answered the fundamental question of  
> whether ordinary BC members will be gaining access to personally  
> identifiable or sensitive personal information (and what information  
> that is) and how ordinary BC members are allegedly "processing" such  
> information. Other BC members can weigh in, but we do not want to  
> have any access to sensitive personal information as part of our BC  
> membership.  As mentioned earlier, requiring compliance with  
> "prevailing privacy laws" is meaningless since such laws differ  
> signficantly depending on jurisdiction.  At a minimum ONLY the  
> Secretariat and Exec Committee Members should be subject to this  
> language assuming they may have access to sensitive personal  
> information.
>
>
> Sarah
>
> Sarah B. Deutsch
> Vice President & Associate General Counsel
> Verizon Communications
> Phone: 703-351-3044
> Fax: 703-351-3670
> sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On  
> Behalf Of Marilyn Cade
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 1:25 AM
> To: Philip Sheppard; bc - GNSO list
> Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
>
>
> Philip, thanks.
> a few initial comments, and then I'll read through again and flag  
> any areas for the BC members of concern to me.
>
> I appreciate that you have now been able to incorporate some of my  
> comments in this version.
> However, I had asked to have a specially designated elected member  
> as the primary CSG rep, and I'd like that added into the list of  
> elected positions.  There seems clear merit to distributing work,  
> and avoiding conflicts of interests by putting too many roles into a  
> single party, or small number of individuals. Spreading work, makes  
> lighter work loads, as we all know. It does mean that coordination  
> are important, of course.
>
> A change that I feel strongly about is that the officers should have  
> only one year terms, with a term limit of no more than three yaers.   
> That is what the IPC does, and it seems prudent to move to one year  
> terms.
>
> In 4.8, we need to make the description consistent within the body  
> of the section to secretariat services, rather than continue to use  
> the term "Secretariat", since the members haven't supported a  
> continuation of a retained position, and the approach being proposed  
> will allow flexibility to either use contracted services or services  
> from ICANN.
>
> I see that this now proposes that executive committee members need  
> not adhere to the BC position. This goes too far. If one is an  
> elected officer, then one has a duty to adhere to the BC position.  
> Can we discuss when you would envision an executive committee member  
> 'acting in their individual capacity'? That might clear up the  
> confusion for me on that one.
>
> I see that this charter is continuing to propose a list  
> administrator. I'm not sure that is a separate function from  
> 'secretariat services'. We want to avoid creating someone who is the  
> 'email police', who has to make judgements about other members  
> communications; I don't see that function in other constituencies --  
> and suggest that we simply have principled approaches to efficient  
> communications.
>
> We can briefly discuss the CSG representative at the huddle this p.m.
>
> Marilyn
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:27:20 +0100
> > Subject: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
> > From: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx
> > To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > I attach the latest version for discussion.
> > I believe we are nearly there.
> > It factors in the majority of clarifying redrafts that have been  
> suggested
> > with the exception of redrafts that replaced current charter text  
> that was
> > to date unaltered.
> >
> > I will pull out those few remaining bigger changes that have been  
> proposed
> > for discussion at the BC meeting in Seoul.
> >
> > Philip
> >
>
> This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or  
> confidential information. It is intended solely for the named  
> addressee. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message  
> (or responsible for delivery of the message to the addressee), you  
> may not copy or deliver this message or its attachments to anyone.  
> Rather, you should permanently delete this message and its  
> attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Any  
> content of this message and its attachments that does not relate to  
> the official business of News America Incorporated or its  
> subsidiaries must be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by any  
> of them. No representation is made that this email or its  
> attachments are without defect.

- - - - - - - - -
phone 	651-647-6109
fax  		866-280-2356
web 	www.haven2.com
handle	OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,  
Google, etc.)