Re: [bc-gnso] urgent update to all BC members -- regarding BC statement regardingBoard-GAC Scorecard issues

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Marilyn and all, 

In discussions with Peter DT, he has made it clear that Monday's comment 
session is critical to coming to closure with the GAC. It is clear that GAC 
members must take something home for their ministers, so we need to give some 
serious thought to what those things might be. Two ideas that come to mind are 
(1) recommend that all community based applications be allowed to apply 
simultaneously for their IDN equivalents  or a small fee per string, which 
would lead to each nation being able to use non-English / non-ASCII scripts 
(and therein a "win"); and (2) suggest that a way to get past the impass of too 
many "2"s in the scorecard would be to go forward with a limited round to start 
so that we can all see if the current AGB (as suggested by the Board) is 
functional or needs the modifications currently  revcommended by the GAC.  In 
any case, according to PDT, we cannot leave SFO without resolution. IMHO, that 
must be the message we share with all we meet in the meeting rooms and 
halls.... 

Kind regards, 

RA 

________________________________________
Ron Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.
randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.rnapartners.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 16:22:51 
To: bc - GNSO list<bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [bc-gnso] urgent update to all BC members -- regarding BC statement 
regarding
 Board-GAC Scorecard issues


During a meeting with Kurt Pritz, V.President, ICANN with the GNSO and the GNSO 
Council, he announced that there is agreement to have short statements from the 
Chairs of the SOs/ACs and SGs at the beginning of the session on Monday that 
reviews the Board and GAC Scorecard Document [showing 1a, 1b, and 2]. 
I am going to convene a process to draft a statement from the BC [we don't have 
a CSG chair/and at this point, the position I have given to the chairs within 
the CSG is that we will each make a statement for our Constituency. I intend 
that we will have a statement, since we have a lot at risk to ensure that the 
input of the BC's Constituency members are reflected in the statement.
Zahid and John are going to have a heavy work load on this -- they have Council 
to 'guide' [and have done a great job already on that in the discussions  so 
far. ]
I will be conferring with excomm on how to do a statement and clear it with you 
all/stay closely tuned.