RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010 Meetingly

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

We are spending a lot of time talking about 'policy committees'.  I
understand that within the broader GNSO context (PDP WGs, DTs, WTs).  In
the case of the RySG I don't believe we have ever formed a group called
a policy committee.  We often solicit volunteers to draft a first cut of
a policy statement for SG review and consideration but the whole SG then
provides input and expresses support or lack of support or provides
minority statements, all of which are recorded in any policy statements
the RySG submits.  Do other SGs or Constituencies actually have standing
'policy committees'?
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 1:28 PM
        To: Harris, Anthony; Claudio Di Gangi; Gomes, Chuck; Rafik
Dammak
        Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010
Meetingly
        
        

        Thanks Tony -I don't think anyone here fails to understand what
a Policy Committee is and isn't.  Again -I don't think repeating the
volunteers point improves it.   

         

         

        Victoria McEvedy

        Principal 

        McEvedys

        Solicitors and Attorneys 

         

         

        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: Anthony Harris [mailto:harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: 07 April 2010 17:56
        To: Claudio Di Gangi; Victoria McEvedy; Gomes, Chuck; Rafik
Dammak
        Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
        Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010
Meetingly

         

        Claudio,

         

        Thanks for this clear response, which I support in it's

        entirety. ICANN's impressive growth since the days

        of it's launching in 1999, has been possible because

        interest groups were allowed leeway to self-organize

        within a framework of constituencies in the manner

        tha worked best for them. Rigid and bureaucratic 

        straightjackets have never been the norm in the

        ICANN environs, and I hesitate to conclude that

        this has changed today.

         

        Two things caught my attention in the recent e-mail

        exchange flow:

         

        I noticed a certain skepticism about the question of

        difficulty in unearthing volunteers in constituencies,

        who would replace officers obliged to step down to

        comply with term limits. Well, be as it may, this is

        frequently a fact of life. Companies and entities may

        be willing to participate in a constituency as members,

        but not many would commit their representatives to

        engage as officers (sit on Council, Stakeholder Group

        Executive Committee, or Constituency Executive

        Committee). The reason? Simple - hours of workload,

        F2F meetings, teleconferences at unseemly hours for

        some, etc. 

         

        With regards to comments that emphasize the need for

        "proposed standard rules to Policy committees", perhaps

        we should venture a reminder that, within a Constituency,

        an Executive Committee is not a Policy Committee, but

        simply a steering group that coordinates the ongoing 

        functions of the Constituency, and ensures the membership

        has all due opportunities to discuss ICANN issues, and

        provide consensus input to the Councillors, and as of now

        the Stakeholder Group Executive Committee, on policy matters

        as they emerge in the GNSO.

         

        Tony Harris

                ----- Original Message ----- 

                From: Claudio Di Gangi <mailto:cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>  

                To: 'Victoria McEvedy' <mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>  ; 
Gomes, Chuck <mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  ; Rafik Dammak
<mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>  

                Cc: Julie Hedlund <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>  ; 
gnso-osc-csg <mailto:gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>  

                Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 11:38 AM

                Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March
2010 Meetingly

                 

                I think the issue is not just limited to the number of
willing volunteers but also about the level of experience, knowledge,
understanding and expertise volunteers have of ICANN and the evolving &
complex issues under consideration. There is also the question of the
potential impact of rules restricting participation on the effectiveness
and efficiency of a group's operations, and the issue of the right to
self-determination in group's setting their own operating rules on these
issues to reflect their unique aspects, characteristics, communities,
etc. - as long as consistent with the ICANN bylaws and the common
principles the group's agree to as identified in GNSO improvements.  In
this regard, a one-size-fit-all rule on participation may produce
disparate impact since the groups represent completely different
interests and communities, etc.

                 

                So while I think it may be easy to just say impose term
limits on all aspects, the impact of such rules need to be considered
against the potential need or benefit of term limits.

                 

                That's being said, we came to agreement on setting term
limits consistent with the BGC recommendations for the executive
leadership, i.e. the elected officers. In outside parlance, term limits
are often limited to the executive branch only in many cases. For
example, see efforts to impose term limits on the Congress in the United
States.

                 

                Hope helpful.

                 

                claudio

                 

                From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 4:43 AM
                To: Gomes, Chuck; Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
                Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
                Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March
2010 Meetingly

                 

                Chuck -while people have talked about the shortage of
volunteers generally - this applies to all committees/and Groups
generally.  

                 

                Based on objections raised on WT calls it seems there
are views that Policy Committees involve special concerns as to
transparency and now to term limits and I don't believe there has been
any real discussion on the distinguishing features of the Policy
Committees in relation to these.   

                 

                Regards, 

                 

                 

                Victoria McEvedy

                Principal 

                McEvedys

                Solicitors and Attorneys 

                

                 

                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: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: 07 April 2010 00:34
                To: Victoria McEvedy; Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
                Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
                Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March
2010 Meetingly

                 

                Victoria,

                 

                It is not true that reasons have not been given.  It
would be more accurate to say that you disagree with the reasons that
have been given.

                 

                Chuck

                 

________________________________

                        From: Victoria McEvedy
[mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
                        Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 AM
                        To: Gomes, Chuck; Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
                        Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
                        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26
March 2010 Meetingly

                        There has been repeated objection to the
application of any proposed standard rules to Policy committees ---but
no reasons for this have been articulated and I for one do not support
their exclusion. They lie at the heart of the work of the Groups.  

                         

                         

                        Victoria McEvedy

                        Principal 

                        McEvedys

                        Solicitors and Attorneys 

                        

                         

                        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 Gomes, Chuck
                        Sent: 06 April 2010 14:33
                        To: Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
                        Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
                        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26
March 2010 Meetingly

                         

                        It may be helpful to realize that the concept of
Executive Committees is now embedded in all the SG charters so there is
a particularly significant role for these committees. Also, the concept
of Executive Committees was not previously built in to the Constituency
concept except indiviudally by some constituencies so the BGC probably
didn't directly focus on these committees when recommending term limits.

                         

                        With that understanding, a reasonable compromise
might be to apply term limits to Constituency/SG officers, Executive
Committees and Council Representatives and recommend them as a best
practice for other committees and subgroups.

                         

                        Chuck

                                 

________________________________

                                From: Rafik Dammak
[mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx] 
                                Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:56 AM
                                To: Claudio Di Gangi
                                Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund;
gnso-osc-csg
                                Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg]
Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010 Meeting

                                Hi Claudio, 

                                 

                                I am in favor of more strong wording,
best practice looks really optional and I am afraid that there won't be
willingness to apply it in groups. 

                                for policy committees, they should be
temporary by their nature if my understanding is correct. 

                                to apply term limit has to be applied
for executive committees.

                                 

                                Regards

                                 

                                Rafik

                                 

                                2010/4/6 Claudio Di Gangi <
cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>

                                Rafik,
                                
                                thanks, i appreciate your response.
                                
                                would you recommend the best practice
for term limits apply only to the group's executive committee or to
which group committees?
                                
                                under what basis is that distinction
made?
                                
                                claudio
                                
                                ________________________________________
                                From: Rafik Dammak [
rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
                                Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:40 PM

                                To: Claudio Di Gangi
                                Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund;
gnso-osc-csg
                                Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg]
Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010 Meeting

                                Thanks Claudio for your explanation, but
I think that we need to improve the current situation and recommend
common best practices. I may understand that few constituencies can face
problem to have people volunteering (even if I have real doubts about
those facts), I think that those constituencies have to work internally
to improve the situation and not asking for lowering standards.
                                I am not sure how the WT will handle
that point, but I am clearly not in favor of what you suggest.
                                @Olga @Michael I think that we need to
make decision about this point and not block the on going review of the
rest of document because the tight schedule  we have
                                
                                Regards
                                
                                Rafik

                                2010/4/2 Claudio Di Gangi <
cdigangi@xxxxxxxx<mailto:cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>>

                                Rafik,
                                
                                Just to further expand on my last reply
to you:
                                
                                In light of the complexities of the
issues that fall under ICANN's remit, it may be necessary or of great
value to a Group to have a volunteer serve on the executive committee or
policy committee for several consecutive terms before they have enough
experience and knowledge etc. to serve as Chair or in another similar
leadership position. That is if the Group is fortunate enough to have
such volunteers who are willing and able to dedicate the time and energy
necessary to serve in these positions in the first instance.
                                
                                No matter how representative a group may
be of its community, one cannot assume that there will be endless pool
of willing volunteers to serve in these positions. On the contrary, what
likely matters more is what community or interest is being represented
by these Groups and how directly or indirectly ICANN's policies impact
them. Each group represents significantly varying interests that are
impacted by ICANN's policies is a markedly different way, so this
directly impacts participation. Therefore rules restricting
participation on committees can impact Groups very unequally, and this
is separate and aside from the issue of representativeness.
                                
                                Therefore, I believe we need to thread
very carefully here. We have agreed to establishing term limits for
constituency officers, which implements the BGC recommendation we were
tasked with addressing. If groups want to expand term limits to other
areas of their operations based on their specifics, that is of course
something they are always able to do through their charters. If it's an
issue our work team feels very strongly about, then I suggest we
consider including it as a best practice.
                                
                                Hope this was helpful.
                                
                                claudio

                                From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:
rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]

                                Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 3:36 AM
                                To: Claudio Di Gangi
                                Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund;
gnso-osc-csg
                                Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg]
Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010 Meeting
                                
                                Hi Claudio,
                                I am confused about your suggestion as
the limit will be meaningless if it is not applied to executive
committee.
                                if there is fears about volunteering,
that issue is more linked to representativeness level of Group.
                                 "but I would not extend the term limit
to policy and executive committees. This is consistent with the BGC
recommendation which we are tasked with implementing, which states:
""There should be term limits for constituency officers, so as to help
attract new members and provide everyone with the chance to participate
in leadership positions."
                                 and after the effort done for II.8 I am
not in favor of deletion.
                                Regards
                                
                                Rafik

                                 

                        
                        
                        __________ Information from ESET NOD32
Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5004 (20100406)
__________
                        
                        The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
                        
                        http://www.eset.com

                        
                        
                        __________ Information from ESET NOD32
Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5004 (20100406)
__________
                        
                        The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
                        
                        http://www.eset.com

                
                
                __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of virus signature database 5005 (20100406) __________
                
                The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
                
                http://www.eset.com

                
                
                __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of virus signature database 5005 (20100406) __________
                
                The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
                
                http://www.eset.com

        
        
        __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
virus signature database 5007 (20100407) __________
        
        The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
        
        http://www.eset.com



        __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
virus signature database 5007 (20100407) __________
        
        The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
        
        http://www.eset.com