Re: [council] NC task forces compositionIssue

["YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>]

Thank you for your clarification, Philip and let us explore more issues to
avoid further confusions later on this complicated issues.

1. The borderline between NC and Non-NC in type a, b, c

Therefore, Interim Committee must have only NC members.

However, Committees and Task Forces can have Non-NC members
under the 3.3 a) + b) + c) + d) + e) + e) + f) + g) conditions. On the other
hand, the total number of Committees and TFs should not be more than
seven(or eight) in principle.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
c) the nominee is not also a member of the same ICANN-relevant organisation
as an NC member on the task force, the NC member taking priority at any time

d) no two nominees are members of the same ICANN-relevant organisation,
the first nominee taking priority

Note: An ICANN-relevant organisation is defined as one that any NC member
considers to be ICANN-relevant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Issue 1] Can you elabarate more on ICANN-relevant organization? If it is
going to be defined according to your Note, I think it should have been
discussed and defined before due to too much rooms for different
interpretation which can easily invites too many unexpected situations.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
f) regardless of the number of members of the group no constituency nor the
general assembly may have more than one vote

Specific variations to the above guidelines may exist within the DNSO rules
of procedures, such specific variations taking precedence. Any other
variation requires the approval of the NC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Issue 2] I don't think NC clarified whether 3.3 f) is going to function as
one of fundamental principle in decision-making process in DNSO or
whether this can be bypassed by the variation adopted by NC under its
specific restrictions.

According to UDRP's ToR, it is very unclear whether they are going to allow
voting rights to every TF members or only NC members, too.

[Issue 3] Is General Assembly going to be considered the 8th constituency in
NC's type a, b, c formtion, which has not been clearly described however,
the consideration of GA have been continuously mentioned. Therefore, I
would like to propose that GA should be formally recognized as 8th group
together with other constituencies.

[Issue 4] The criteria on when those variation can be proposed under which
condition?

To prepare for any potential abusive practice for "variation" which has
led both NC and Non-NC members to confusions many times when it
comes to consensus-buidling process within the DNSO, NC should
encourage principles rather than too much flexibilities which easily can
end up with "charges" for non-transparent process for DNSO.

YJ