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

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Olga,
 
My comments were not in anyway intended to change what we already
decided on the charter.  It should be considered approved as of end of
day yesterday.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
        Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 11:58 AM
        To: Gomes, Chuck
        Cc: Victoria McEvedy; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
        Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Change to OSC-CSG 10 April Draft
Meeting Notes
        
        
        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
<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#sg-petitions> . 

                         

                        Best, 

                         

                        Victoria McEvedy

                        Solicitor and Attorney at Law

                         

                        McEvedy & Associates

                         

                        Solicitors & Attorneys

                         

                         

                        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_te
am_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