Re: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask 1

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think that Cuck´s proposal sunds more clear.
what do others think?
Olga

2009/4/23 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

>  Do we really mean 'participation' or should we be talking about
> membership eligibility?  For example:
>
> 1. Develop guidlines, rules or principles for constituency membership in
> stakeholder groups, and
> 2. Develop guidelines, rules or principles for membership in
> constituencies.
>
> I am not sure it is our task to recommenda how constituencies should
> participate in SGs or for that matter how individuals or organizations
> should participate in constituencies, but I believe the Board definitely
> want reasonably open membership for SGs and constituencies.
>
> Chuck
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Claudio Di Gangi [mailto:CDiGangi@xxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:03 AM
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck; Michael Young; Victoria McEvedy; Papac, Krista;
> jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
>
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
>  *Dear Team,*
>
> * *
>
> *After re-reading the thread, I believe I better understand the text.
> Perhaps the following small tweak makes the language more clear:*
>
> * *
>
> *"1. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation **for **
> constituenc**ies** **across **stakeholder group**s**." and *
>
> *"2. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation for members
> in a constituency. " *
>
>
>
> Claudio
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Gomes, Chuck
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 22, 2009 10:07 AM
> *To:* Michael Young; Victoria McEvedy; Papac, Krista;
> jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
>
>
> Neutral is fine.  I thought 'new' was being added when maybe the red meant
> deleted.  My mistake.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Michael Young [mailto:myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 22, 2009 10:02 AM
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck; 'Victoria McEvedy'; 'Papac, Krista';
> jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; 'OSC-CSG Work Team'
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
> Victoria I understood your edits were to remove the “new” and just make
> the statements neutral as to either new or existing constituencies?  Chuck
> do you mean to more specific? Rather than neutral maybe it should just read
> as follows:
>
>
>
> *"1. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation in a new or
> existing constituency for each stakeholder group." and *
>
> *"2. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation for new or
> existing members in a constituency. " *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael Young
>
>
>
> Vice-President,
>
> Product Development
>
> Afilias
>
> O: +14166734109
>
> C: +16472891220
>
>
>
> *From:* Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* April-22-09 9:52 AM
> *To:* Michael Young; Victoria McEvedy; Papac, Krista;
> jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
>
>
> Please note that our tasks with regard to constituency operations relates
> to both existing and new constituencies.  So to the extent that the new
> wording eliminates existing constituencies, I don't think it works.  But
> maybe I am misunderstanding something.  I strongly believe that we seriously
> need to discuss this in our meeting and that that will be much more
> effective.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Michael Young [mailto:myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 22, 2009 8:33 AM
> *To:* 'Victoria McEvedy'; 'Papac, Krista'; Gomes, Chuck;
> jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; 'OSC-CSG Work Team'
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
> I think Victoria’s point is quite valid and therefore support the language
> with her edit.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Michael Young
>
>
>
> Vice-President,
>
> Product Development
>
> Afilias
>
> O: +14166734109
>
> C: +16472891220
>
>
>
> *From:* Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* April-22-09 2:55 AM
> *To:* Papac, Krista; Gomes, Chuck; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work
> Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
>
>
> As to the language issue, I do think we should discuss on our call the
> carve out issue first –ie are there any aspects of the BGC’s report and
> recommendations on constituency structure: inclusiveness, effectiveness and
> efficiency (see pages 39-46) that anyone considers are not in our remit? If
> so why?
>
>
>
> I am happy with the changes below –with the deletion of the words NEW in
> each case –as our recommendations will apply to existing constituencies just
> as to new ones.
>
>
>
> I would like to suggest a way to combine these recommendations, whereby we
> adopt the recommendation made by S.S., but keep the existing item 1, as
> suggested by Olga and Michael, and also change the text as suggested by
> Victoria.  *Here is the suggested text: *
>
>
>
> *"1. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation in a 
> **new**constituency for each stakeholder group." and
> *
>
> *"2. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation for 
> **new**members in a constituency. "
> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Victoria McEvedy
>
> Principal
>
> McEvedys
>
> *Solicitors** and Attorneys *
>
> [image: cid:669FC637-760A-4D2F-B56E-2C180C1870CC]
>
>
>
> 96 Westbourne Park Road
>
> London
>
> W2 5PL
>
>
>
> T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
>
> F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
>
> M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169
>
> * *
>
> *www.mcevedy.eu  ***
>
> Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
>
> 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 *Papac, Krista
> *Sent:* 22 April 2009 02:27
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
>
>
> Sorry all.  I am just catching up.  I, too, am fine with 1 and 2 below.
>
>
>
> Julie, thank you for the well articulated outline of the various
> suggestions.
>
>
>
> Krista Papac
> Sales Executive
> Iron Mountain Digital
> 5530 Bandini Blvd
> Bell, CA  90201  US
> Home Office: +001.714.846.8780
> Mobile: +001.646.379.4689
> Fax: +001.323.443.3573
> krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Visit the new www.ironmountain.com
> Tour Iron 
> Mountain<http://www.ironmountain.com/US/services/tours/corporate.asp>
>
> *© 2008 Iron Mountain Incorporated. All rights reserved. Iron Mountain and
> the design of the mountain are registered trademarks of Iron Mountain
> Incorporated.*
>
> *Iron** Mountain Privacy Policy:
> http://www.ironmountain.com/legal/privacy.asp  Iron Mountain, 745 Atlantic
> Avenue, Boston, MA, 02111 
> **www.ironmountain.com*<http://www.ironmountain.com/>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Gomes, Chuck
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:04 PM
> *To:* jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
>
>
> I am fine with the latest suggested wording for 1 and 2 below.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Julie Hedlund
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2009 2:56 PM
> *To:* OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] OSC-CSG Work Team Work Plan Task 1, Subtask
> 1
>
> Dear Work Team Members,
>
>
>
> We have had a very helpful discussion on the email list that has produced
> several recommendations to amend the language in Task 1, Subtask 1, of our
> work plan.  Here are the recommendations:
>
>
>
> 1.  *S.S. recommends changing*:
>
>
>
> "1.  Develop guidelines for defining admission decision procedures for a
> new constituency for each stakeholder group."  to:
>
> "1.  Develop guidelines for defining admission decision procedures for a
> new member for each constituency."
>
>
>
> 2.  *Victoria** noted that the language she suggested and that we all
> agreed  to was*:
>
>
>
> “Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation...” to replace
> “template for admission decision procedures..."
>
>
>
> 3.  *Olga and Michael suggested that there could be two items -- a revised
> item 1 and a new item 2 as follows*:
>
>
>
> "1.  Develop guidelines for defining admission decision procedures for a
> new constituency to a stakeholder group." and
>
> "2. Develop guidelines for defining admission decision procedures for a new
> member for each constituency."
>
>
>
> I would like to suggest a way to combine these recommendations, whereby we
> adopt the recommendation made by S.S., but keep the existing item 1, as
> suggested by Olga and Michael, and also change the text as suggested by
> Victoria.  *Here is the suggested text: *
>
>
>
> *"1. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation in a new
> constituency for each stakeholder group." and *
>
> *"2. Develop guidance, rules or principles for participation for new
> members in a constituency. " *
>
>
>
> I welcome your comments and suggestions.  Thank you.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Julie
>
> Julie Hedlund
>
> Policy Consultant
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *The information contained in this email message and its attachments is
> intended only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named
> above, unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email
> over the Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are
> requesting or have requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in
> applicable privacy laws by means of email or in an attachment to email you
> must select a more secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your
> obligations to protect such personal data. If the reader of this message is
> not the intended recipient and/or you have received this email in error, you
> must take no action based on the information in this email and you are
> hereby notified that any dissemination, misuse, copying, or disclosure of
> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the
> original message. *
>
>