Regarding Article 7 para. f
This comment is being written in my personal capacity as a member of the ICANN community.
I question the wording in Article 7 paragraph f.
f. One delegate from consumer and civil society groups, selected by the Non-Commercial Users Constituency.
As this language differs from all other language in this article it seems to be making a political point that is superfluous and inappropriate to the article.
The NCUC has the membership it has and this may be an item the Board and ICANN Policy Staff wish to discuss with the NCUC when it comes time for renew charters. Yes, it is true that the NCUC contains many consumer groups and civil society groups. It does not, however, seem appropriate that it should single out just two groups from within the NCUC as being qualified to serve on the Nomcom. Does this rule mean to exclude the academics or any of the individuals who are currently members of the NCUC? Must one be a member of a specific kind of group to be chosen for the Nomcom? This seems wrong.
Additionally, the ICANN Policy Staff is currently working to form a consumer group. It is all well and good for the ICANN Board to insist that a consumer constituency be formed and that the ICANN Policy Staff implement that policy, that is within their purview as defined elsewhere in the ByLaws. Once such a group is formed, however, is seems wrong that the NCUC should be forced to pick someone from a consumer group when all of the consumer groups have been forced, or are being forced, into another constituency. Again, this seems wrong.
This clause should be revised and framed in exactly the same form as it is frameed for the other constituencies:
f. One delegate selected from the Non-Commercial Users Constituency. Thank you Avri Doria Community member