[PC-NCSG] Fwd: [council] Motion – Withdrawal of the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN

[Marilia Maciel]

This topic has been included on the agenda of the GNSO calls several times
without a serious exchange between councillors. There was no appetite to
either discuss the topic thoroughly or to say what people would like to see
improved. The reiterated inclusion on the agenda seemed fishy, but the
motion does come as a surprise considering people did not bother to
articulate their concerns. The motion mentions that the CCWG-IG does not
follow the life cycle established by the Principles for Cross Community
Working Groups. However, even if this would be the case, the framework for
CCWGs is new and any previous CCWGs should be given an opportunity to
adapt. I think we should force those that are backing the motion to express
their views clearly and give a time to the CCWG-IG to work on specific
improvements suggested by the GNSO. This is just basic fairness. The motion
should be withdrawn. If it is tabled, my vote would be against the motion.

Thanks
Marilia

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:28 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Stephanie,
>
> I think NCSG should oppose the motion and asks for reviewing and amending
> the charter instead.
> I don't recall GNSO withdrawing from any WG before and  in particular with
> this manner.
> While the GNSO council put the CWG-IG in the agenda for several calls
> since Marrakech and get reports, I don't think there was a proper
> discussion on how to move forward or suggesting changes. the CWG principles
> framework  is an opportunity  to amend the charter not to attempt to kill
> the CWG-IG.
> the motion seems unilateral action from contracted party (while  the
> motion looks being drafted by Marika).
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2016-10-28 0:31 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.
> utoronto.ca>:
>
>> We will need a common position on this folks.  Preferably soon as we
>> start early, and from my perspective, I am not up to date re our prevailing
>> views on this matter.  Seems risky to me....
>>
>> cheers Stephanie
>>
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: [council] Motion ? Withdrawal of the GNSO as a Chartering
>> Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet
>> governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN
>> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 16:56:30 -0700
>> From: Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell at endurance.com>
>> <darcy.southwell at endurance.com>
>> To: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>
>> <council at gnso.icann.org>
>>
>> Dear Councilors,
>>
>>
>>
>> Attached is a motion for the GNSO to withdraw as a Chartering
>> Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet
>> governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN for our November 7 Council
>> meeting.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Darcy
>>
>> __________
>>
>> *Darcy Southwell *| Compliance Officer
>>
>> M: +1 503-453-7305 ? Skype: darcy.enyeart
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>


-- 

*Mar?lia Maciel*
Digital Policy Senior Researcher, DiploFoundation

WMO Building *|* 7bis, Avenue de la Paix *| *1211 Geneva - Switzerland
*Tel *+41 (0) 22 9073632 *| *
*Email*: *MariliaM at diplomacy.edu <mariliam at diplomacy.edu>* *|** Twitter: *
*@MariliaM*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20161102/8bf62f2c/attachment.html>