[PC-NCSG] Revised IPC Motion

[Matthew Shears]

See inline


On 6/29/2016 11:48 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> On Jun 29 11:40, Matthew Shears (mshears at cdt.org) wrote:
>
>> 2. The Drafting Team shall comprise those volunteers from the GNSO
>> community which are identified by their Constituencies and
>> Stakeholder Groups who express interests*and/or have a* [can
>> demonstrate reasonable] knowledge of or experience with the process
>> of revising the ICANN Bylaws _or GNSO operating procedures_.
>> Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups are requested to identify
>> volunteers by letter to the GNSCO Council Chair by 22 July 2016.
> Question: who should they demonstrate their knowledge or experience?
I am suggesting that the language in the brackets be taken out.
>
> To me such language suggests SGs/constituencies would not be allowed
> to choose their own representatives but only suggest then for someone
> higher up to approve, or not.
Agree - "select" would be better
>
>> If we want this to be done at the SG level do we need/want a reference to
>> constituencies?
> Don't we want language to ensure there will be enough our people,
> that is, something explicitly specifying equal numbers by SG
> (by constituency count we'd lose)?
>
> Or am I missing something?
Agree.
>

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987