[PC-NCSG] NPOC comment on the NCSG IFRC/IOC comments

[Robin Gross]

Thanks for sending this Avri.

Unfortunately there still seems to be some misunderstanding as to how  
decisions of the NCSG Policy Committee are made, although I know I  
have explained this very same point before.  I will try again.

The NCSG Charter sets forth the process of decisions taken by the  
NCSG Policy Committee.  It is by members of the NCSG Policy Committee  
(which include representatives of all constituencies).  It is *not*  
the case that constituencies within NCSG must agree on a position for  
it to be the view of the NCSG Policy Committee.  Nor is it the case  
that 100% of the NCSG Policy Committee members must agree on a  
position - although I will note in this case no member of the NCSG  
Policy Committee expressed disagreement with the proposed position of  
the NCSG PC - so that isn't even an issue.

The fact remains that this NCSG position was proposed to the NCSG  
Policy Committee, which include members of NPOC, and discussions of  
the proposal took place with 100% agreement to support this position.

For anyone to come back now and say NCSG policy committee did not  
support this position because 1 member of the PC who did not speak up  
at the time doesn't like it, is simply wrong, and needs to review the  
NCSG Charter to review how decisions of the PC are taken.  I hope I  
do not have to continue to repeat this explanation every time the  
NCSG PC takes a decision.  We follow the NCSG Charter.  That is all.

Best,
Robin


On Oct 2, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Should have included this reference:
>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/ioc-rcrc-recommendations/msg00000.html
>
>
> On 2 Oct 2012, at 12:52, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> For several weeks, at various times, the NCSG position on the IFRC/ 
>> IOC resolution was discussed in the NCSG Policy Committee list.
>>
>> NPOC has three members on this committee, 2 appointed  
>> representatives and the chair of the NPOC, which I beleive is  
>> Alain himself.
>>
>> This committee gave its approval to the NCSG comments per the NCSG  
>> Charter.
>>
>> NPOC could have objected at any point in that process.  They did not.
>>
>> The Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee declared the decision of  
>> the Policy Committee, which according to charter does not need to  
>> be unanimous, though in this case it apparently was.
>>
>> I do not know what the NPOC did internally in its discussions, or  
>> whether the representatives of the NPOC on the NCSG Policy  
>> Committee where tracking this with their members internal  
>> structures, but to now say that you were excluded from the  
>> decision is just not an accurate reflection of the case within the  
>> NCSG or the NCSG Policy Committee.
>>
>> The NCSG postion listed in the document is the NCSG position as  
>> developed in its Policy Committee according to its charter.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




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 at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20121002/e0917929/attachment.html>