Changes

The public comment period on the final report received thirty-one comments. The summary report of public comments characterized ten of those comments as not germane to the specific topics contained in the final report, and noted that four of them merely requested an extension of time for the public comment period.<ref>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00033.html ICANN Listserv Archive - Public Comment Proceeding Summary email from Robert Hoggarth], May 6, 2008</ref> There were extensive comments on the recommendations. A collective of user constituencies (ALAC, the Commercial and Business Users Constituency, the Intellectual Property Constituency, the Internet Service and Connection Providers Constituency, and the Non-Commercial Users Constituency) presented a joint proposal for restructuring the council.<ref>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00012.html ICANN.org Listserv Archive - email from Philip Sheppard re: joint users proposal], April 23, 2008</ref> From the summary report:  

The public comment period on the final report received thirty-one comments. The summary report of public comments characterized ten of those comments as not germane to the specific topics contained in the final report, and noted that four of them merely requested an extension of time for the public comment period.<ref>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00033.html ICANN Listserv Archive - Public Comment Proceeding Summary email from Robert Hoggarth], May 6, 2008</ref> There were extensive comments on the recommendations. A collective of user constituencies (ALAC, the Commercial and Business Users Constituency, the Intellectual Property Constituency, the Internet Service and Connection Providers Constituency, and the Non-Commercial Users Constituency) presented a joint proposal for restructuring the council.<ref>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00012.html ICANN.org Listserv Archive - email from Philip Sheppard re: joint users proposal], April 23, 2008</ref> From the summary report:  

<blockquote>The finalized UC [joint proposal] contribution expresses support for the effort to create a better representational balance on the GNSO Council, but the UC says the BGC WG’s recommendations have three defects that 'contradict the goals of improving policy development and maximizing stakeholder participation.' The UC says the defects include (1) over-representation of contract parties; (2) insufficient stakeholder participation; and (3) external credibility issues.<ref name="finalpc">[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/docSBOmLSrq2b.doc Summary Report of Public Comments on GNSO Improvements], May 7, 2008 (Word document)</ref> The joint proposal offered this alternative to Council composition:

<blockquote>The finalized UC [joint proposal] contribution expresses support for the effort to create a better representational balance on the GNSO Council, but the UC says the BGC WG’s recommendations have three defects that 'contradict the goals of improving policy development and maximizing stakeholder participation.' The UC says the defects include (1) over-representation of contract parties; (2) insufficient stakeholder participation; and (3) external credibility issues.<ref name="finalpc"></blockquote>[https://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/docSBOmLSrq2b.doc Summary Report of Public Comments on GNSO Improvements], May 7, 2008 (Word document)</ref> The joint proposal offered this alternative to Council composition:

* create a "a parity triangle of equal representation to represent all stakeholders." - 6 seats each for contractual interests (registries and registrars), commercial interests, and non-commercial interests;

* create a "a parity triangle of equal representation to represent all stakeholders." - 6 seats each for contractual interests (registries and registrars), commercial interests, and non-commercial interests;

* consider using NomCom appointments to the GNSO Council to provide specific expertise to working groups; and  

* consider using NomCom appointments to the GNSO Council to provide specific expertise to working groups; and