Dear Eric and Ray,
For today's discussion, and to address Eric's question, below is a quote
from the BGC report pertaining to the constituency model/structure, on page
39 of the report in the section 6. Recommendations re: Constituency
Structure. (See the full report at:
feb08.pdf.) Rob may have additional comments prior to, or during, our
meeting. I will be sure to capture the main points of our discussion and
circulate these after the call for those who cannot be on the call.
I hope that this is helpful.
Report of the Board Governance Committee, GNSO Work Group, Page 39, 6.
Recommendations re: Constituency Structure:
"Our goal is to make the way in which stakeholders interact in the GNSO,
whether organized as constituencies, interest groups, or another vehicle, as
inclusive and representative as possible, without sacrificing effectiveness
or efficiency. The constituency structure that has served as the basis for
determining membership on the Council and its task forces, as well as for
developing and voting on policy advice to the ICANN Board, needs to adapt in
light of the move to a working group model, revisions to the PDP, and a
restructured Council. It should be noted that we view the new stakeholder
structure primarily as a way to organize the Council. While it will also
encourage the constituencies to maximize their common interests, it does not
on its own change the constituency structure itself."
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Eric Brunner-Williams
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 9:28 AM
To: Ray Fassett
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] GNSO Operations-Teleconference call today
Ray Fassett wrote:
I have an open question from Eric pertaining to my previous comment
that the BGC re-affirmed its commitment to the ICANN constituency
model. I would ask that Julie or Rob confirm this for us.
Thank you Ray, I was hoping for a link, from anyone, to this point. I've
a CORE concall at 1500. Its the standard CORE call time. Perhaps by email.