[CCWG-ACCT] Communique - revised - any feedback by midnight Argentina time

Sat Jun 20 12:13:28 UTC 2015

Dear Doctor,
Minority opinion should be fully and duly considered and be taken into
account like any other opinion
We welcome you for the initiative
Regards
Kavouss

2015-06-20 13:06 GMT+02:00 Dr Eberhard W Lisse <epilisse at gmail.com>:

> Dear Co-Chairs,
>
> please take note that I am willing to volunteer as the Rapporteur for the
> Minority Opinion(s).
>
> greetings, el
>
> --
> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5s
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2015, at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the Draft Communique
> For the review of what we have done and for having a fresh look to the
> process, we need to act more openly, democratically and neutrally.
> From the very beginning I warned  the group that the Proposed model with
> UA does not work ,
> I asked to consider something more practical , less complex and workable.
> Unfortunately ,I was pushed to be silent as some people did not like the
> vision that I had with respect to the workability of that method /concept .
> Even at some meeting , calls ,I was unfairly and unexpectedly
> interrupted at various occasion and  was not allowed to freely express my
> view .The above course of action was not  a healthy approach.
> I strongly suggest that we seriously change our working method in
> particular ,the role of the chair and few other participants  in order to
> allow every body to freely and openly expresses himself or herself
> .The role of the chair should be limited to just conduct the meeting in a
> friendly, fair and democratic manner. We need to respect each and every
> person during the debate
> We have only one more opportunity and must use it properly .
> Good luck
> Best Regards
> Kavouss
>
> 2015-06-20 4:07 GMT+02:00 Dr Eberhard W Lisse <epilisse at gmail.com>:
>
>> When EXACTLY was this drafted?
>>
>> el
>>
>> --
>> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5s
>>
>>
>> On Jun 19, 2015, at 17:10, Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Attached in doc and pdf are the updated communique - clean, and showing
>> all the changes tracked. Mathieu finalised this.
>>
>> I've also pasted the clean version below for easy reading.
>>
>> *Any comments or issues please to the list or the co-chairs by midnight
>> Argentina time (around seven hours from time of sending)*.
>>
>> cheers
>> Jordan
>>
>>
>>
>> *Members and participants of the Cross Community Working Group on
>> Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) met in Buenos Aires,
>> Argentina, on June 19, 2015.*
>>
>>
>>
>> The CCWG face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina, was attended
>> in-person by XXXX members and participants, as well as by a number of
>> participants and observers that joined the meeting remotely using the
>> virtual meeting room. XXX Advisors also participated.
>>
>>
>>
>> The group discussed the summaries it had earlier prepared of the comments
>> received from the community during the first public comment period on its
>> initial draft report (
>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-2015-05-04-en)
>> and can report the following:
>>
>>
>>
>> Broad support was received for the overall accountability architecture
>> proposed, based on on 4 building blocks, i.e. an empowered community, the
>> Board, the Bylaws and the Independent Review Process.
>>
>>
>>
>> Most comments considered the proposals would be improvements to ICANN’s
>> current accountability mechanisms.
>>
>>
>>
>> Several commenters recommended the CCWG take a more detailed look at the
>> accountability of the community itself (the SOs and ACs) and also to ensure
>> that ICANN is accountable to all stakeholders, including those outside
>> ICANN.
>>
>>
>>
>> While most commenters expressed support for the recommendations, some
>> expressed concerns primarily regarding implementation details, legal
>> implications and complexity, as well as on the underlying costs and risks
>> associated with the proposals.
>>
>>
>>
>> The CCWG values the input received so far and will continue working to
>> refine its initial draft report.
>>
>>
>>
>> While encouraged by the support received on the overall approach, the
>> group acknowledges the concerns expressed and will give due consideration
>> to suggestions and concerns as it develops a revised proposal in
>> preparation for the upcoming second public comment period.
>>
>>
>>
>> With regards to the community empowerment mechanism, the CCWG considered
>> various models presented in the meeting and acknowledged commonality of
>> views with regards to expectations of such models, including the need to
>> set up mutual accountability, and enhancements to openness and diversity.
>>
>>
>>
>> In particular, a number of commenters have raised concerns with the
>> reference model. In that model, SOs and ACs would be required to set up
>> separate legal entities, such as formally registering unincorporated
>> associations, as their legal vehicle to exercise community powers. Feedback
>> suggested that the community sees this model as too complex. The CCWG has
>> analyzed these comments carefully and will now focus its work on a refined
>> model. This fresh approach, provisionally called the Empowered SO/AC model,
>> gives the community comparable authority while not adding legal entities
>> separate from the SOs and ACs.
>>
>>
>>
>> The CCWG also considered public comments related to the dependencies with
>> the CWG-Stewardship's final proposal. As the CWG’s proposal is under
>> consideration by Chartering organizations, the CCWG notes that each of the
>> items that the CWG has identified as critical to its proposal received
>> overall support from the community. None of the comments suggested that CWG
>> requirements could or should not be met.
>>
>>
>>
>> The CCWG will share these outcomes and considerations with the various
>> groups and communities during ICANN 53. The group looks forward to
>> continuing the fruitful exchanges that inform further deliberations towards
>> a second round of public comment, which is expected to be published by the
>> end of July.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Note*: video summaries of the basic accountability approach are
>> available:
>>
>>
>>
>> -       English: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h8i2exC6HA
>>
>> -       French: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YodtRRNymkU
>>
>> -       Spanish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLALPEOlrHk)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jordan Carter
>>
>> Chief Executive
>> *InternetNZ*
>>
>> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
>> jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>> Skype: jordancarter
>>
>> *A better world through a better Internet *
>>
>>  <Draft Comunique v2.docx>
>>
>> <Draft Comunique v2.pdf>
>>
>> <Draft Comunique v2 clean.docx>
>>
>> <Draft Comunique v2 clean.pdf>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150620/897adfba/attachment.html>