Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Change to OSC-CSG 10 April Draft Meeting Notes

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chuck,
thank you very much for your detailed and clear answer to Victoria.

I totally agree with you that the involvement of constituencies in our
working group is relevant  in order to  minimize conflicts and generate a
good outcome.

On the other hand  as we have not recieved any comments, additions or
deletions fabout our charter, we should consider the present text as the
agreed version.

Please share your views and documents in this list and do not forget that we
still need volunteers for leading some subtasks of our working plan.

Regards to all
Olga


2009/4/14 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

>  Let me take a crack at this Victoria.
>
> My first answer is that it depends on:
>
>    - How detailed the charters are
>    - Whether or not any of the CSG WT recommendations are approved by the
>    Council and the Board and then conflict with any elements of SG charters.
>
> I suspect that some of the recommendations we come up with will not
> conflict with charters because the charters will not include detailed
> information regarding the recommendations.  For example, I would predict
> that a recommendation for ICANN funding website hosting for all SGs would
> not conflict; charters will probably include the provision of an SG website
> but may not discuss how that would be funded.  I know that is the case for
> the proposed RySG Charter.
>
> But there also may be cases where approved recommendations will conflict
> with some SG charters.  Here's a possible example of that: Let's assume the
> Board approves a CSG WT recommendation that all SG email lists must be
> publicly archived.  I think it is quite likely that some charters will not
> provide for this or may provide for no public archiving at all.  In cases
> like this, assuming the Board approved any such SG charters, they will
> probably have to be amended.
>
> Ideally, it would have probably been better to complete the CSG WT work and
> seek Board approval of any recommendations before implementing the SGs and
> hence the SG charters.  But the Board wanted to get the bicameral structure
> implemented sooner than would be possible if we waited until the WTs were
> finished.  To implement the bicameral Council, SG charters are needed.
>
> In my opinion, the above illustrates how important it is for the CSG WT to
> get lots of input from constituencies and SGs so that we hopefully can
> minimize conflicts between our recommendations and SG charters.  It will
> probably not be possible to avoid all conflicts but maybe we can avoid some.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Chuck
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Victoria McEvedy
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:01 AM
> *To:* Olga Cavalli; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
> *Cc:* OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Change to OSC-CSG 10 April Draft Meeting
> Notes
>
>  Can I trouble the team –and please accept my apologies if I am missing an
> obvious point, how does our work fit in with the fact that charters are
> already being submitted by stakeholder groups for approval?
>
>
>
> Will this render our recommendations/work ineffective and/or too late for
> the restructuring?
>
>
>
> See http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#sg-petitions.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Victoria McEvedy
>
> Solicitor and Attorney at Law
>
>
>
> McEvedy & Associates
>
> * *
>
> *Solicitors** & Attorneys*
>
> [image: McEvedy]
>
>
>
> 96 Westbourne Park Road
>
> London
>
> W2 5PL
>
>
>
> T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
>
> F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
>
> M:   +44 (0) 7824 442 600
>
> M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169
>
> * *
>
> *www.mcevedy.eu  ***
>
>
>
> This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the
> exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also
> be legally privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us
> know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without
> reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
>
> This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer
> is created by this email communication.
>
>
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Olga Cavalli
> *Sent:* 13 April 2009 21:12
> *To:* jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
> *Cc:* OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Change to OSC-CSG 10 April Draft Meeting
> Notes
>
>
>
> Dear Work Team members,
>
> I hope this email finds you well.
>
> Please remember that we agreed during our last conference call to *review
> the draft charter and to indicate your approval/disapproval by the end of
> today Monday, 13 April.**
>
> If no dissenting comments are received by that time the charter will be
> considered to be approved.*
> *
> Link to the draft charter in our Wiki:
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_work_team_draft_charter
>
> *In order to allow all the team members to review the suggested changes,
> comments and deletions, the texts shows these edit marks until we decide to
> agree on a certain text.
>
> It could be useful for our working team to arrange a face to face meeting
> during the Sydney ICANN meeting, so I will ask Glen to find a time and place
> during for this. If you have any comments in this regard please let me know.
>
> For those who did not participate in the conference call, you can find the
> meeting notes in our wiki:
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operation_work_team_meeting_notes
> .
>
> Regards to all.
>
> Olga
>
>
>  2009/4/13 Julie Hedlund <jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Dear Work Team members,
>
>
>
> S.S. has made an excellent suggestion that it would be helpful if the team
> could easily reference the comments he has provided via email on the
> constituency background materials sent by Rob Hoggarth.  Accordingly, I have
> placed a link to the comments provided by S.S. in the form of a Word
> document at item 4  in the Draft Notes of the meeting.   (See the Wiki at:
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operation_work_team_meeting_notes
> .)
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> Julie Hedlund
>
> Policy Consultant
>
>
>
>
>
>