[gnso-ppsc] RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp]

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Avri for your note and I do encourage you to listen to the
recording.  I would like to send to you the same answer I sent to Robin
earlier in the week.  As chair, it is my responsibility to make sure
that all viewpoints are heard and reflected in the ultimate report.  I
need to do that regardless of the actual number of people that attend
meetings or calls.  In other words, if the registrars have 2 people on a
call, but the NCSG only has one, I cannot give more weight to the
registrars than to the NCSG simply because they have more people.
Similarly, the fact that there is only one person from the NCSG that
attends a meeting does not mean that its voice is heard less.  We need
to stop focusing on the issue of quantity, but rather quality.  It is
the same reason why the RySG and RrSG accepted less members on the STI
than the NCSG and CSG have on that committee. The RrSG and RySG have 2
members, while the other 2 SGs have 3 members each.   The registries and
registrars agreed early on that as long as our voice was being heard
(which we believe it is), then we would not focus on the number of reps.

With respect to ICANN policy staff, I will let ICANN staff address.

Finally, with respect to new blood, I believe that is an issue for all
working groups as they are COMMENCING their work.  As we are trying to
wrap up our work, I am not sure the face to face meeting (intended to
finalize a report) is the place to make the call for diversity.  The
group discussed this issue at length and felt that the persons being
funded should be ones that either (i) active in the group or (ii) are
dedicated to the remain active in the group for the reminder of its life
span.  I am paraphrasing, but you should listen to the recording.  We do
not believe someone should be funded to attend the face to face if they
have rarely if ever been on a WT call or meeting or have never filled
out any of the surveys.  Anyone and everyone is free to participate
remotely.

I hope that helps to understand some of our thinking.

Please let me know if you have any questions.  



Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy


The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately and delete the original message.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 4:36 AM
To: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: PPSC; Chuck Gomes
Subject: Re: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] 


Hi,

On reading it, and I have not listened to the recording of the meeting
yet, I object to the disparity in treatment between the two non
contracted SG groups.  

There should be the same number of representatives from each of the
Stakeholder groups.    As written this prevents the council members
appointed from the Board, or other member the NCSG executive committee
wishes to send, from participating.  This continues a disparity in the
treatment between non-commercial and commercial that was to have been
eliminated by the restructuring.

It should either be 1 from each SG or 3 from each.  The number of
constituencies should be irrelevant at this point.

I will be checking with the NCSG Executive Committee, so at this point
this is a personal point of view, but as Chair of the NCSF Executive
Committee I wish to lodge a provisional protest.

I also object that this request to the Council does not include specific
information on the staff that the ICANN Policy groups plans to send.  I
understand their very active participation in this work team, and think
that council members should know how many staff members will be sent
since that is part of the expense that needs to be accounted for.

I have heard other details about discussions during the meeting that
concern me, especially that affect to the need to include new blood and
diversity in this group, but will comment on those specifically once I
have listened to the recording.

a.



On 5 Dec 2009, at 07:43, Neuman, Jeff wrote:

> Dear PPSC members,
>  
> Please find enclosed a draft request for a PDP Work Team face to face
meeting in January 2010 setting for the rationale for needing such a
working session.  This draft was discussed by the PDP Work Team this
past Thursday.  It is our intent to send this to the GNSO Council by no
later than December 9th so that it can be discussed at the GNSO Council
meeting.
>  
> As this is a first, we wanted to make sure that the entire PPSC was
made aware of the request prior to sending it to the Council.  Unless
there is a strong objection by the PPSC as a whole, this will be sent to
the Council next Wednesday.  I have also included Chuck Gomes on this
note so that he is aware that this will be coming.
>  
> I know there are a few on the Council that have expressed reservations
about the face to face and that is the reason this document has been put
together - namely, to explain our rationale.
>  
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
> Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965
/ jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx  / www.neustar.biz     
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately and delete the original message.
>  
> <Request for a PDP WT Face to Face meeting - updated 3 December
2009.doc>