[CCWG-ACCT] Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for CCWG ACCT WP1 Meeting #3 4 March

Wed Mar 4 23:18:18 UTC 2015

Dear All, 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the WP1 Meeting #3  - 04 March will be available here:
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52889993

Action Items

ACTION ITEM Call for volunteers to work on Board action on bottom-up recommendations - Volunteers:
Steve del Bianco, Jeff Neuman

ACTION ITEM Kavouss to circulate note on .xxx

ACTION ITEM - Send Steve, Fiona, Matthew your comments. 

ACTION ITEM: Jordan to restructure two mechanisms (WS 1/WS2), to add in the alternate suggestion 

ACTION ITEM - To follow up with Keith Drazek

ACTION ITEM: Additional volunteers needed on community veto

ACTION ITEM: Circulate templates by end of this week preferably

Notes

*        WP1 rapporteur - Jordan Carter - walked the WP through the agenda, provided an outline of
CCWG discussions held on 5 March and flagged that Rapporteurs will have a meeting with the 
Co-Chairs on 6 March to discuss shape of output. 

Feedback:

- Are we addressing  <http://booking.com/> booking.com 

-> WP2

- Consider addressing implementation (timeline etc) 

Affirmation of Commitments and Related Reviews

Steve del Bianco walked the WP through 2A,B,C,D,E draft
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888421/Draft%201-%20AoC%20Accountability%20Mecha
nisms%20%5BSteve%20v4%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1425370283000&api=v2>
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888421/Draft%201-%20AoC%20Accountability%20Mechan
isms%20%5BSteve%20v4%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1425370283000&api=v2 

Feedback:

- Other AoC elements should be included in the Bylaws 

-> 3, 4, 7, 8 are worth considering. Work is underway. Comments are welcome. 

- Effectiveness of GAC should not be reviewed. We should not be putting doubt on effectiveness of
doubt. Suggestion to remove "and effectiveness" 

--> This is verbatim from AoC 

-->Do other reviews in bylaws include effectiveness? If so, we should keep it. 

- How do we guarantee implementation? 

--> Obligation from Board to take action.- do we want stronger language? 

--> Proposed language: 1) consider approval and begin implementation; 2) required action 

ACTION ITEM Call for volunteers to work on Board action on bottom-up recommendations - Volunteers:
Steve del Bianco, Jeff Neuman

- Specify which supermajority we are choosing

--> we will need to determine whether 3/4 or 4/5. Supermajority should be in brackets 

- Concerns about courses of action/modalities 

ACTION ITEM Kavouss to circulate note on .xxx

- TImeline needs to be revisited to allow for implementation 

- Output of CCTRT should be considered in design of susbequent rounds

- Suggestion to delete WHOIS review and combine with CCTRT

- Empower the community by allowing the community a process to introduce different types of reviews

ACTION ITEM - Send Steve, Fiona, Matthew your comments. 

Removing ICANN Board Directors

Jordan Carter walked the WP 1 through draft
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888421/Accountability%20Mechanism%20Template%20W
P1%207A%20-%20Removing%20ICANN%20Directors.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1425285656000&api=v2>
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888421/Accountability%20Mechanism%20Template%20WP
1%207A%20-%20Removing%20ICANN%20Directors.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1425285656000&api=v2

Feedback: 

- Both options (removing of whole Board and removing individual Board members) should remain but
criteria should be different. Quid of nterim?

- Both should remain - separation between WSs is not obvious. Need to change the appointment rules:
every appointment should be 2 persons: 1 acting and 1 back-up (if removed etc) i.e. alternates. 

- For individual removal, should it be community mechanism or individual SO/AC mechanism? 

--> Removal of individual Board member could be done by community but with consent of SO/AC 

- All gravitate to idea of spilling Board: should that be a necessary condition of transition?
Strickling says it s a missing component. Write up with assumption it will never be used - Focus
exclusively on mechanism called spill the Board and a second mechanism to recall one or several
Board mechanism. Recommendation to make it done by splitting these two mechanisms - one WS1, one WS2

- Giving community opportunity to micromanage 

ACTION ITEM: Jordan to restructure two mechanisms (WS 1/WS2), to add in the alternate suggestion 

Work status

The CCWG reviewed the work status matrix
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NIrzK3mlGBbIHtdZDoAt_9Y__aPYXAH_d-OIbkg2Z6k/edit?usp=sharing>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NIrzK3mlGBbIHtdZDoAt_9Y__aPYXAH_d-OIbkg2Z6k/edit?usp=sharing

- Prevent ICANN from Imposing obligations: 

ACTION ITEM - To follow up with Keith Drazek

- Call for volunteers to work on Board action on bottom-up recommendations - Volunteers: Steve del
Bianco, Jeff Neuman

- Roelof Meijer and Edward Morris volunteered to work on statutory delegates/members.

- Jordan Carter volunteered to work on permanent CCWG

- Volunteers are needed 

ACTION ITEM: Additional volunteers needed on community veto

ACTION ITEM: Circulate templates by end of this week preferably

A.O.B

The WP discussed the Istanbul WP prep meeting. Ensure WP1 does not conflict with WP2.

Next Meeting will be Wednesday, 11 March 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150304/f7e93156/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150304/f7e93156/image001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150304/f7e93156/smime.p7s>