[CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: CORRECTED Agenda - WP1 - 2 Nov at 18h UTC

Jordan Carter jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Mon Nov 2 06:58:50 UTC 2015


Dear CCWG as a whole

As ever, you are invited - meeting begins in around 11 hours.

see icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability for the meeting.

best,
Jordan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
Date: 2 November 2015 at 19:58
Subject: CORRECTED Agenda - WP1 - 2 Nov at 18h UTC
To: "wp1 at icann.org" <wp1 at icann.org>


Hi all

*I clicked send on the last email before finishing it - please ignore and
use this one.*


We have a WP1 meeting scheduled for Tuesday 2 November, from 18h UTC with a
max time of 120 mins. I hope the meeting will be a little shorter.

Here are the proposed agenda items in brief - a fuller annotated version
follows below. *If you have items to add*, please share them with the list
ASAP.

*Brief Agenda: WP1 Call on 2 Nov 2015*

*1. Review of Agenda*

*2. Community Decision making*
   a) Split decisions within SOs/ACs
   b) Participating SOs and ACs
   c) Distribution of decision making between SOs and ACs
   d) Decision thresholds in the community mechanism

*3. The "Resolution / Dialogue" Step in the escalation path*

*4. Budget Power - Update from J Zuck (IF he is available)*

*5. Update from ICANN Staff about what WP1 needs to do next*

*6. Any Other Business*


Here is a more detailed agenda that sets out how I propose we tackle this.

For each item I've tried to distil my own impression of the sense of the
last call, the discussions in Dublin and more broadly from the email
traffic among CCWG members. This is in the service of us coming to some
conclusions.

As was suggested by Roelof in the last meeting, and amended a little, I'm
framing these as "WP1 recommends to the CCWG that......" statements. We can
either sign them off, change them, or agree we can't agree and kick it up
to the CCWG.


*1. Review of Agenda*

*2. Community Decision making*

In dealing with this agenda item, besides the Working Paper circulated
previously <
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zHZl_NvQ1WChatX8NT2Q1rQi4zQZgbrbAxrQSsH3tZQ/edit?usp=sharing>,
I attach a slightly updated version of Steve's "homework" paper, Robin's
paper with different distribution of decision making power, and the charts
that Greg prepared, fyi.

   a) Split decisions within SOs/ACs

*WP1 recommends to the CCWG that each SO or AC should come to a decision by
means of its own processes, and that "split" decisions or delegating
decisions to sub-units will not be available.*


   b) Participating SOs and ACs

*WP1 recommends to the CCWG that decision rights for the exercise of
community powers be granted to the GNSO, ccNSO, ASO, ALAC and GAC. SSAC and
RSSAC will be able to advise the other SOs or ACs through the Community
Forum. Each SO or AC has the right to participate or not participate in any
decision, with their choice not affecting the thresholds established for
the exercise of community powers.*


   c) Distribution of decision making between SOs and ACs

*WP1 recommends to the CCWG that each of the five SOs and ACs with decision
rights have an equality of voice/influence in decisions to exercise
community powers.*


   d) Decision thresholds in the community mechanism

*WP1 recommends to the CCWG that the levels of agreement among SOs and ACs
in support of exercising a power, and the limits to levels of opposition,
be agreed as those set out in the paper from Steve DelBianco updated by
Jordan Carter and discussed at this meeting.*


*3. The "Resolution / Dialogue" Step in the escalation path*

To the best of my knowledge the WP1 hasn't discussed the escalation path as
a group. I have some specific concerns about the appropriateness of a
"resolution/dialogue" step in exercising some of the powers - removal of
individual directors, and the standard and fundamental bylaws.

In those powers I think adding this step simply slows down what needs to
happen - for individual director removal it's the SO and ACs decision and
the chances of it coming out of the blue are low.

For the bylaws powers, the appropriate step once the community has not
adopted or blocked a bylaws change is a resolution process that leads to a
new proposed bylaws change. With public comment etc. That's what would
happen today, and that's the right resolution -- not some kind of
negotiation.


For the remaining powers - say, rejection of a budget etc - this resolution
/ dialogue might be useful. But we would have to specify WHO the resolution
or discussion was between. Is this simply handing a new role and
responsibility to the SO/AC leadership cadre?

If not, to whom? Remember, our Community Forum and Community Mechanism are
not committees, have no representatives, and just act on the decisions of
the SOs and ACs.


*4. Budget Power - Update from J Zuck (IF he is available)*

*5. Update from ICANN Staff about what WP1 needs to do next*

It would be great to hear from ICANN staff what they need for us to do as
WP1 to make the 15 November deadline.


*6. Any Other Business*



*Papers*

The papers mentioned above - from Steve/me, from Greg, from Robin, are
attached.


Thanks all, speak soon,


Jordan




-- 
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
*InternetNZ*

+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz

*A better world through a better Internet *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151102/11f7d0e8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: alternative weights in Community Mechanism.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 43752 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151102/11f7d0e8/alternativeweightsinCommunityMechanism.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Comparison Chart - Revised.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 202836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151102/11f7d0e8/ComparisonChart-Revised.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2015-11-02-Community-Decision-split-decisions-v2.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 27653 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151102/11f7d0e8/2015-11-02-Community-Decision-split-decisions-v2.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2015-11-02-Community-Decision-split-decisions-v2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 77660 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151102/11f7d0e8/2015-11-02-Community-Decision-split-decisions-v2.pdf>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list