[npoc] Re: Info Request and Update --GNSO NCPH January 2013 Inter-Sessional Planning - Traveler Info Requested

[Alain Berranger <alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Bill, Thanks and one more iteration embedded in color in the text below

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 1:07 AM, William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx> wrote:

> Oh, two messages with the same subject line…
>
> On Dec 8, 2012, at 2:47 AM, Alain Berranger wrote:
>
> Hi and thanks Bill,
>
> Of course, I agree that ICANN is not about ICT4D.
> I'm not sure we face a policy making vs ICT4D issue... Rather, NPOC's
> perspective is more about a broader view of what GNSO can do in the quickly
> evolving IG scene... so inclusion, equity and opportunity in the Global
> South come from ICT4D yes, but can also come from IG work... Of all people,
> you would know that in spades!
>
>
> It is indeed a concern I share, part of why I spent four years organizing
> IG4D workshops at the IGF to work out an intellectual agenda and then began
> beating the drums until they turned it into an annual main session.
>  Unfortunately, since then it has sort atrophied intellectually, and turned
> from an effort to systematically assess developmental dimensions of CIR
> policymaking and related issues into a let's talk about anything related to
> the Internet and the global south sort of affairs.  So it goes with
> democratization and inclusion, people do what they're interested in...
>
>
I believe that at ICANN, we need to not only do policy work but also
understand the impact of ICANN policies on development...so why not have
IG4D discussions at ICANN?

>
> Yes we may have time to discuss in LA, but it will be a very low priority
> for us…
>
>
> GNSO policy is a very low priority for you?  And you don't think that's a
> problem?  We are going to LA to talk about how to do it more effectively,
> so yes, you may be bored….
>
> No, the low priority is to discuss with NCSG Execs who have no time nor
respect in some case for NPOC folks. We will limit our dialogue in LA to
those willing to follow the letter and spirit of NCSG Charter section 1.2.d
:".... treating others with dignity, respect and courtesy..."


> What ever happened to this:
>
> *The purpose of the NPOC is to represent, specifically, the operational
> concerns related to service delivery of not-for-profit and non-governmental
> organizations who are domain registrants in the DNS.
>
> NPOC will focus on the impact of DNS policies and their effects on the
> operational readiness and implementation of non-commercial missions and
> objectives.  NPOC members rely on the Internet and DNS policies to provide
> valuable services to their communities.
>
> NPOC will engage the ICANN community on how proposed and existing policies
> and initiatives may uniquely impact the operations of not-for-profit and
> non-governmental organizations and the delivery of their mission-related
> services.  Such not-for-profit and non-governmental organizational
> perspectives on operational concerns include domain name registration,
> expansion of the DNS, fraud and abuse, using the DNS to provide and collect
> information and serve their members and communities.
>
> The operational concerns described above drive how NPOC members actively
> manage their infrastructure, create and improve internal processes and
> controls, manage risk, and respond to and respect the welfare of the
> communities they represent.*
>
> Aside from the initial intellectual property claims, we've never seen any
> real activity geared toward defining just what the above mean practically.
>  What operational concerns about readiness and implementation do you that
> that relate to GNSO policies?  Is your community fired up about domain name
> registration, expansion of the DNS, fraud and abuse, using the DNS to
> provide and collect information and serve their members and communities?
>  If so, why not develop proposals, initiatives, statements along these
> lines so everyone would understand better?  And then bring these into the
> conversation in LA, the GNSO, etc?
>

I agree that NPOC's policy work is nescent, insufficient and understand
that you would like to see more contributions from NPOC - so would I. We
are trying hard to bring new blood to NPOC/NCSG but the NCSG membership
application process has been a barrier to that, at least in terms of speed
and spirit. Our very experienced Vice-Chair, Lori Schulman had to disengage
for personal reasons. That was a big loss to NPOC in terms of her expected
accelerated engagement in the months to come which will now not happen. If
we cannot bring in more people like Poncelet Ileleje and Marie-laure
Lemineur and Eduardo Monge into NCSG/NPOC we will not be able to increase
our contribution to a critical and significant level. It is a case of too
few volunteers having to do all the work - I note volunteer fatigue
already. We are also active in a number of WGs (SIC, IRTP, Thick Whois just
recently) and are increasing this aspect of our work as part of our
learning curve. We contributed to the discussions on the new proposed Cyber
cafe Cy and are part of the WG. We did not run any NPOC candidates for the
GNSO Council because we are not ready and we have more than enough to do at
the Cy and SG level. How long did it take NCUC and NCSG to reach its
current capacity? 10-12 years? Even the NCUC folks' interventions are
limited to a few very active members, mostly from academia or IP sector not
civil society, on the NCSG-Discuss list. We are dancing as fast as we
can...

>
>
> we like to do a bit more than just listen to old tunes from the old timers
>
>
> aka people who are engaged and know the issues
>
> ...yes, but we have not failed to notice from some a tremendous defensive
attitude of acquired entitlements and quite a resistance to change and
newcomers... Face it, knowing the issues as you do, puts you in a
leadership position to share, train, disseminate... (As you did in Baku at
NPOC Side Session and I thank you again for it!). Avri, on that count, is
litterally a one-person Training Academy as she is a very generous
professional in carrying out those leadership activities... Avri
participated in NPOC  very first webinar on the DNS for NGOs in December
2011. We also note, again from some, a very disrespectful tone in
discussions using personal attacks, innuendo and sarcasm... which makes
newcomers very hesitant to jump in... nobody likes to be wacked in emails!

> who know it all, you see, so not sure the NPOC reps will that interested -
> we have to build capacity in NPOC for outreach, dissemination,
> communications and advocacy and to do that we need to invest loads of
> precious time to go through the hoops of NCSG membership apllication in
> order to bring in new blood into NPOC to do all these things,
>
>
> Which things?
>
> which has turned out to be a recurring nightmare, a barrier to entry in
> fact and a very inefficient process; Also, we will look at the pros and
> cons of initiating a quick NCSG Charter modification process. If not doable
> - which is most likely - we will patiently await the GNSO Review.
>
>
> Perhaps what you need to review is revisiting the NPOC charter.  If it
> doesn't actually describe what you are interested in, put forward an
> alternative.  If there's consensus among board and staff that it fits the
> remit of ICANN, we can then consider how the NCSG charter might be tweaked
> to accommodate it better.
>
> Or, if your driving interest really is not the GNSO, you might consider
> some other reformation—e.g. as an ALS, or member of the Global Alliance for
> ICT for Development, or one of the myriad other outfits dealing with ICT4D.
>  They might not offer the free travel to swank locales, but they might be
> more suited to your true interests and hence less a catalysts for the
> recurring nightmare etc.
>
> You should follow your bliss, and it may be that a putting a square peg in
> a square hole would be an easier path.  But if you prefer a challenge, then
> please undertake work consistent with your charter, bring it into the GNSO,
> and fight it out like the rest of us!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
>
> Cheers, Alain
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:03 PM, William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 23:11, Alain Berranger <alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello from Salaberry-de-Valleyfield,
>>
>> 1) Nobody is saying the GNSO Councilors shouldn't be there, they should
>> be there...
>>
>>
>> That is actually what you said.  We can read.
>>
>> That said, it is desirable in my vieww to attain parity of participants
>> per SG *AND* parity of participants per Cy within SG.
>>
>>
>> With contradicts your prior sentence and seems to reflect a continuing
>> non-acceptance of the NCSG charter, under which Councilors are elected by
>> and represent the whole SG.
>>
>> You obviously favor or are satisfied with SG parity ONLY, and why
>> wouldn't you the business as usual scenario?
>>
>>
>> BAU = democratic processes followed
>>
>> But NPOC is now a reality of the NCSG and we value Cy parity within an
>> SG.
>>
>> Can we please A2D on this for reason of practicality as I see no
>> flexibility on either side of the issue ever since NPOC was created and do
>> not expect movement on this?
>>
>>
>> We worked hard on the charter before you came and are loathe to toss it
>> overboard now to suit you, yes.
>>
>> Do you? Bill, as future NCSG-EC Chair, you might as well get used to that
>> reality right away...
>>
>>
>> Believe me I am
>>
>> Frankly, what I do not appreciate is the thinking that would claim that
>> "parity" of any kind will be attained if NCUC has 14 representatives and
>> NPOC only 6! That's not parity, that's imbalance!
>>
>>
>> And bad math
>>
>>
>> 2) Secon point I want to make: the finality of a Cy or a SG for that
>> matter is not to only produce policy for the GNSO, that's it that's all.
>>
>>
>> Here we do disagree.  I believe the purpose of organizing noncomm
>> interests in the GNSO is in fact to advance nommcomm interest in the GNSO,
>> Consistent with the by laws.  It is not to just be an a generic outreach
>> and capacity building activity for Internet matters generally.  There are
>> other venues for that, related eg to the IGF.  the summer schools, Diplo,
>> GigaNet, etc etc...
>>
>> What is needed her is actual engagement on GNSO issues and processes.
>>  That's how groups build street cred and get taken seriously; just
>> demanding to be given stuff does not have the same effect.  Participate,
>> make a difference, then over time people will vote for you for Council if
>> that's your fixation.  Don't and they won't, simple as that.
>>
>> Policy making from the base is most important of course, even critical.
>> However, I think the mission of a Cy/SG also includes, or can include or
>> should include: training, dissemination, advocacy and any form you think
>> outreach can take... and if the NCSG Charter does not allow that, then
>> let's change the Charter. We also have to promote inclusion, we have to
>> contribute to eradicating the digital divide, we have to fight for ICT4Ds
>> and poverty reduction,
>>
>>
>> In GNSO?  It's not an ICT4D group, not its mission.
>>
>> we have to fight for an inclusive and resilient internet governance...
>> that too is worth flying around the world to discuss. ICANN is at a
>> cross-roads - you in Dubai now know more than the rest of us watching at a
>> distance... how ICANN global outreach efforts by the NCHP contribute to
>> ICANN's continued relevance is as worthy of discussion as policy making.
>>
>>
>> I'm afraid we have fundamentally different concepts of the purpose of
>> participating in GNSO and ICANN.  Maybe that needs to be discussed in LA...
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:42 AM, William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello from Dubai
>>>
>>> I proposed adding the Councilors in order to equalize the number of
>>> participants per SG on 9 October.  Multiple messages have been exchanged on
>>> the thread since then, and nobody questioned the concept of having our SG
>>> wide elected representatives there until now.  So why days after names were
>>> to be submitted (and the Councilors have confirmed their availability) are
>>> we now hearing that there's a problem with them participating? The time to
>>> do this, for whatever reason, would have been earlier.
>>>
>>> On the substantive merits: If, as the strawman agenda suggests, this is
>>> intended to be a meeting on NCPH engagement in GNSO processes and NCPH
>>> perspectives on GNSO issues, it would make sense to have our SG represented
>>> by the people who represent us in GNSO Council processes and are most
>>> closely engaged with the issues.  That would be a meeting worth flying
>>> across the planet for.  If instead the meeting and its planning are going
>>> to be all about competitive demands for imaginary positional goods, I
>>> cannot see the point of the exercise.  We'll already have enough of that
>>> with the CSG, why we'd want to replicate it internally at the front end is
>>> beyond me.
>>>
>>> We really need to set aside the asking for stuff bit and focus on actual
>>> GNSO work.
>>>
>>> Back to the equally frustrating negotiations—at least here it's
>>> governments playing games.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> PS: Milton and Rafik are unavailable anyway.
>>>
>>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 7:33 PM, Alain Berranger wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Robin,
>>>
>>> Thanks. I understood the situation.
>>>
>>>  In practice, how many seats for NCSG's needs will end up going to NCUC
>>> members and how many to NPOC members? It seems that the Cy parity is less
>>> important to you than to me. In a way, that is not surprising so let's A2D
>>> again on that one and move on.
>>>
>>> NPOC will soon designate a replacement on the NCSG-EC for Lori Schulman,
>>> until our 2013 elections anyway - I will let the NCSG-EC know as soon as
>>> possible - we have called for nominations and will communicate our decision
>>> mid-december.
>>>
>>> As a NCSG-EC member, I suggest that 5 of the 8 SG wide seats go to the
>>> NCSG-EC, ie. you, Milton, Rafik, myself and the new appointee. That would
>>> still end up 8 NPOC participants and 12+1 NCUC participants with 5 of these
>>> representing the NCSG-EC.
>>>
>>> I'm less concerned about the NCSG numbers as there will be no shortage
>>> in LA, but am concerned about having enough new NPOC members to be able to
>>> start a little Cy capacity building.
>>>
>>> Does that spirit and letter work for you and other NCSG-EC members?
>>>
>>> Best, Alain
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Alain,
>>>>
>>>> NCSG on the one hand as the SG, and NPOC and NCUC on the other hand as
>>>> constituencies play different roles, perform different functions and have
>>>> different responsibilities according the NCSG Charter.
>>>>
>>>> Neither NCUC nor NPOC may over-take the positions at this mtg reserved
>>>> for the NCSG representatives, who were elected by the entire NCSG
>>>> membership (including NPOC members) to perform NCSG functions and
>>>> responsibilities.
>>>>
>>>> The constituencies each are allocated 6 seats to ensure their needs are
>>>> met, and the NCSG is allocated 8 seats to ensure that NCSG's needs are met.
>>>>  Each constituency will have to make due with what has been allocated to
>>>> it, as will NCSG.  I hope that clears it up.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Robin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 4, 2012, at 11:46 AM, Alain Berranger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Robin, Bill:
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, we do not need the GNSO councillors per se; they can simply show
>>>> up as NCUC members... given the parity in numbers between Cys stated by
>>>> Rob, I find it more equitable if NPOC gets 10 seats like NCUC... if not, it
>>>> will be NCUC with 14 members and only 6 for NPOC. We need parity between
>>>> the 2 Cys. Also, if I can mobilize 10 NPOC members, we can have our EC
>>>> members (the Toronto NPOC  delegation + Cintra)  plus representatives from
>>>> Africa, LAC and Asia.  Indeed, we would like to use the meeting for
>>>> capacity building of our Constituency... that's better for ICANN, as NCUC
>>>>  is well established and has had 12 years to build capacity and
>>>> leadership... NPOC has had a little more than one year...
>>>>
>>>> What do you say?
>>>>
>>>> Alain
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Alain,
>>>>>
>>>>> NCSG-wide seats will go to NCSG-wide representatives (i.e. the NCSG
>>>>> GNSO Councilors) not to individual constituency members.  NPOC will have 6
>>>>> to allocate and should use those for NPOC representatives.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Robin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Alain Berranger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Robin,
>>>>>
>>>>>  For now, on a preliminary basis to be confirmed, here are NPOC's 4
>>>>> intended attendees under NCSG-wide allocation:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Klaus Stoll
>>>>> 2. Cintra Sooknanan
>>>>> 3. Marie-laure Lemineur
>>>>> 4. the undersigned
>>>>>
>>>>> I will confirm soonest possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best, Alain
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Date: Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:47 AM
>>>>> Subject: Info Request and Update --GNSO NCPH January 2013
>>>>> Inter-Sessional Planning - Traveler Info Requested
>>>>> To: Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>, Marilyn Cade <
>>>>> marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rafik
>>>>> Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>, "michaeladams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <
>>>>> michaeladams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "mtrachtenberg@xxxxxxxxxxx" <
>>>>> mtrachtenberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Alain Berranger <alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>,
>>>>> Klaus Stoll <klaus.stoll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tony Holmes <
>>>>> tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>,
>>>>> David Cake <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: David Olive <david.olive@xxxxxxxxx>, Joseph de Jesus <
>>>>> joseph.dejesus@xxxxxxxxx>, Karen Lettner <karen.lettner@xxxxxxxxx>,
>>>>> Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, Margie Milam <
>>>>> Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>, "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Marilyn, Robin, Bill, Tony, Alain, Marc, David, Klaus, Michael
>>>>> and Rafik;
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to you all for the latest round of contributions to planning
>>>>> for the January meeting.  This message contains confirming information and
>>>>> to-do’s regarding the meeting logistics and a modified draft program for
>>>>> the meeting.  You have all provided very helpful and reasonable input
>>>>> allowing us to fashion logistics that should generally meet all your
>>>>> expectations for the meeting.  There are still areas of the program that
>>>>> need additional input and that can be adjusted further, but we are now at
>>>>> the point where you can begin providing the names of your participants so
>>>>> that we can begin making travel arrangements for everyone. ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> As you review the material below and in the attached document, please
>>>>> alert me as soon as possible if you think I have misinterpreted any input
>>>>> and if the results are not to your satisfaction.  While we have had
>>>>> to make some compromises, I think we are “in the ballpark” in addressing
>>>>> most of the various views and requests. ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Please try to get all or most of your planned meeting participant
>>>>> names and email addresses in to me by the end of this week – 1 December.
>>>>> *  We can continue the dialogue regarding the draft agenda for
>>>>> another couple of weeks, but the attendee travel arrangements need to 
>>>>> start
>>>>> being made as soon as possible to ensure that everyone has a flight and a
>>>>> hotel room close by the ICANN office.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Confirmed Logistics:*
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Dates and Location:* January 29 and 30, 2013 at ICANN HQ in Los
>>>>> Angeles, California****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Meeting Hotel:*
>>>>>
>>>>> Doubletree by Hilton Hotel Los Angeles - Westside
>>>>>
>>>>> 6161 West Centinela Avenue****
>>>>>
>>>>> Culver City, CA, 90230-6306****
>>>>>
>>>>> Phone: 1-310-649-1776  ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Attendance:* Based on the concept of a strategic meeting of
>>>>> community leaders, the allocated meeting budget and available space in the
>>>>> ICANN Los Angeles office,****
>>>>>
>>>>> 41 community participants – 20 from each Stakeholder Group plus the
>>>>> Nominating Committee Appointee assigned to the GNSO’s Non Contract Party
>>>>> House – will be able to attend the meeting in-person.  Remote
>>>>> participation capabilities will beprovided to allow other interested
>>>>> community members designated by their SG or Constituency to attend.  The
>>>>> meeting events will be recorded and transcribed by ICANN.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on input received, the fairest allocation of slots seemed to be
>>>>> the following:****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> For the CSG, 6 attendees each for the BC, IPC and ISPCPC, plus two
>>>>> CSG-wide seats.****
>>>>>
>>>>> For the NCSG, 6 attendees each for the NCUC and the NPOC, plus 8
>>>>> NCSG-wide seats.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> These allocations are based on the input that there should be
>>>>> numerical parity between SGs and Constituencies and to give flexibility
>>>>> within the SG’s as well to the maximum extent possible. As you will see
>>>>> from the draft agenda, there is time in the program for each SG to arrange
>>>>> for specific community discussions on matters that are of particular
>>>>> interest to them.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Each Constituency and Stakeholder Group has flexibility in indicating
>>>>> who will attend on their behalf.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> There did not seem to be a consensus on attendance by the GNSO Council
>>>>> leadership or representatives from the Registry or Registrar Stakeholder
>>>>> Groups.  Therefore, no attendance from those parties is anticipated
>>>>> in the participant count or in the agenda topics now being proposed.**
>>>>> **
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Travel will be arranged through the ICANN Travel Team. The Travel Team
>>>>> will reach out directly to all designated attendees with travelspecifics
>>>>> and instructions on how to make reservations and arrangements.  ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Please try to get all or most of your attendee names and their email
>>>>> addresses in to me by the end of this week – 1 December 2013.* *A
>>>>> simple email from you to me with the list of names, community
>>>>> title/position (if any) and contact email address will suffice.*****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Program:*
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Since there seems to be an understandable and reasonable difference of
>>>>> views regarding the scope of topics to be discussed at the meeting, I have
>>>>> modified the proposed program/agenda structure to provide for more balance
>>>>> between joint (general session) meeting time and individual community
>>>>> meeting times. The goal is to let you take advantage of the two days to
>>>>> both conduct individual community discussions, and to also engage in
>>>>> broader discussions about critical engagement and outreach topics common 
>>>>> to
>>>>> all.
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> *Please review the modified agenda at your earliest convenience.*  I
>>>>> would welcome reactions to this modified approach and I am sure further
>>>>> tweaks and adjustments to time frames and topics would improve the program
>>>>> even more. I am happy to clarify any areas of the proposed program that 
>>>>> are
>>>>> not yet clear or fully fleshed out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that I have incorporated the idea of a stage-setting panel or
>>>>> speaker on Day 2 to provide us with a common knowledge base about the
>>>>> future of the ICANN ecosystem. I welcome reactions to that idea, and, if
>>>>> you think the idea has any merit, suggestions for possible
>>>>> speakers/panelists (most likely remote participant(s)).****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You will note that the program still includes an evening reception on
>>>>> the evening of Tuesday January 29 at the DoubleTree Hotel.  We anticipate
>>>>> that you may wish to invite some local LA contacts or other potential
>>>>> outreach connections.  We are tentatively setting the arrangements for 80
>>>>> attendees at the reception – including meeting participants.
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Meeting Report/Assessment:*
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Because this meeting is designated as a “pilot” project in the FY13
>>>>> ICANN Budget document, Staff will be preparing an assessment report after
>>>>> the meeting concludes to assess its success.  Please expect a contact
>>>>> from me in early February asking for your views about the meeting planning
>>>>> effort and how the meeting went for you and your community members.***
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *Interest in a Programming Call?*
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Given travel schedules and time zone differences, I think the
>>>>> email-input approach has worked fairly well.  Please let me know if
>>>>> any of you think we would benefit from a final teleconference to iron out
>>>>> any differences with respect to the agenda. If so, I would propose to
>>>>> schedule the call some time later next week (December 6 or 7).****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, again, for your willingness to contribute to this effort.  I
>>>>> appreciate all your advice and input.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>>>>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, 
>>>>> http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>>>>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>>>>> www.schulich.yorku.ca
>>>>> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
>>>>> www.gkpfoundation.org
>>>>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>>>>> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
>>>>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>>>>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
>>>>> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
>>>>> ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
>>>>> destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
>>>>> destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
>>>>> interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
>>>>> reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint 
>>>>> ou
>>>>> si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
>>>>> sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
>>>>> votre coopération.
>>>>>
>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
>>>>> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
>>>>> use of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by
>>>>> anyone other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person
>>>>> responsible for forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited
>>>>> to disclose, distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message,
>>>>> in whole or in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have
>>>>> received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
>>>>> this
>>>>> e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IP JUSTICE
>>>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>>>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>>>>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>>>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>>>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, 
>>>> http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>>>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>>>> www.schulich.yorku.ca
>>>> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
>>>> www.gkpfoundation.org
>>>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>>>> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
>>>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>>>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
>>>> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
>>>> ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
>>>> destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
>>>> destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
>>>> interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
>>>> reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
>>>> si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
>>>> sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
>>>> votre coopération.
>>>>
>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
>>>> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
>>>> use of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by
>>>> anyone other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person
>>>> responsible for forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited
>>>> to disclose, distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message,
>>>> in whole or in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have
>>>> received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this
>>>> e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IP JUSTICE
>>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>>>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, 
>>> http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>>> www.schulich.yorku.ca
>>> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
>>> www.gkpfoundation.org
>>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>>> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
>>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>>
>>>
>>> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
>>> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
>>> ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
>>> destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
>>> destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
>>> interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
>>> reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
>>> si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
>>> sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
>>> votre coopération.
>>>
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
>>> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
>>> use of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by
>>> anyone other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person
>>> responsible for forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited
>>> to disclose, distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message,
>>> in whole or in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have
>>> received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this
>>> e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, 
>> http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
>> www.schulich.yorku.ca
>> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
>> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
>> Skype: alain.berranger
>>
>>
>> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
>> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
>> ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
>> destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
>> destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
>> interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
>> reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
>> si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
>> sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
>> votre coopération.
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
>> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use
>> of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone
>> other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for
>> forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose,
>> distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or
>> in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this
>> e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and
>> destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, 
> http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
>
>
> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
> ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
> destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
> destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
> interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
> reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
> si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
> sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
> votre coopération.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use
> of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone
> other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for
> forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose,
> distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or
> in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this
> e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and
> destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>
>
>
>


-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger


AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
votre coopération.

CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use
of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone
other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for
forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose,
distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or
in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and
destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.