[CCWG-ACCT] Issues with Providing Public Comments on CCWG-Accountability Proposal

Greg Shatan gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Wed Dec 2 18:33:55 UTC 2015


All:

Two issues with public comments.  The first is primarily logistical.  The
second is more fundamental.  Both are frustrating.

First, the "SurveyMonkey" link for the survey to respond to the Proposal is
not working.  The link is
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ccwg-acct-draftproposal and the response is

This webpage is not available

ERR_CONNECTION_TIMED_OUT

In any event, it can be difficult to see all of a survey in advance so that
responses can be drafted, reviewed and revised appropriately before being
entered  into the survey.  Can a PDF or other version of the entire survey
be circulated here and posted on the public comment page as soon as humanly
possible, please?

Second, the public comment page at
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-2015-11-30-en
has
the following statement:

The six Chartering Organizations for the CCWG-Accountability are asked to
indicate their support for the recommendations in this proposal. At the
same time, public participants not involved with a Chartering Organization
are invited to comment on the proposal.

This implies that the public comment period is limited to "public
participants not involved with a Chartering Organization."

Does this mean that, for example, the Intellectual Property Constituency is
somehow barred from public comment?
Does this also mean that our members, e.g., INTA, are also barred from
public comment (since they are "involved" with the GNSO through membership
in the IPC)?
Does this also mean that members of our members, e.g., "Company X" (a
member of INTA), is barred from public comment (since they are "involved"
with the GNSO through INTA's membership in the IPC)?
How about members of the GAC and the ccNSO?  Are all the members barred
from commenting as well?
If any of the above are not barred from public comment, will their public
comments somehow be discounted because they are involved with a Chartering
Organization, thus not "invited" to comment, and also assumed to have
another outlet for their comments?

At the very least, it is confusing and off-putting.  At worst, it could
have the effect of chasing away potential commenters due to their
"involvement" with a Chartering Organization.

Clarification would be most appreciated.

Greg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151202/55a5a165/attachment.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list