[CCWG-ACCT] TR: Practical suggestions for constructive CCWG-Board dialogue

Tue Jan 5 17:41:15 UTC 2016

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Dear colleagues,

A belated happy new year to you all. I am trying to catch up on the
most recent developments in the CCWG, one of which is the email
underneath.

I have not been able to find a response by the board to the request
from the co-chairs underneath, or have I missed a response?

All the best,

Niels

On 12/24/2015 01:14 PM, Mathieu Weill wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> 
> 
> For your information, a correspondence sent by the co chairs to
> Steve Crocker in his capacity of Chair of the Icann Board. Staff
> will shortly add it in the correspondence section of our Wiki.
> 
> 
> 
> Best wishes to all of you.
> 
> Mathieu
> 
> 
> 
> *De :*Mathieu Weill [mailto:weill at afnic.fr] *Envoyé :* jeudi 24
> décembre 2015 12:26 *À :* 'Steve Crocker' *Cc :* 'Bruce Tonkin';
> 'Fadi Chehade'; 'Cherine Chalaby (cherine.chalaby at icann.org)';
> Thomas Rickert (thomas at rickert.net); León Felipe Sánchez Ambía
> (leonfelipe at sanchez.mx); 'ACCT-Staff' *Objet :* Practical
> suggestions for constructive CCWG-Board dialogue
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Steve,
> 
> 
> 
> The CCWG-Accountability 3rd public comment phase is now closed and
> we appreciate and value the amount of effort dedicated by the
> Board, through a series of meetings, in order to provide our group
> and the community with comments in this process. As you know
> dialogue has started on our list regarding several items raised by
> the Board and we look forward to continuing this fruitful
> dialogue.
> 
> 
> 
> Our group is actively preparing the analysis of all the comments 
> received, in order to finalize its recommendations, and want to
> inform you of these plans as well as offer a constructive way
> forward for a constructive dialogue.
> 
> 
> 
> In the CCWG-Accountability process, the Icann Board holds two
> distinct roles :
> 
> - the Board is one the affected stakeholders, and as such, its 
> contributions, as well as those of the individual Board members
> are welcome and encouraged ;
> 
> - the Board also committed, in its 16 October 2014 resolution to
> assess CCWG Accountability recommendations on the basis of global
> public interest, and engage into a special dialogue with the CCWG 
> Accountability in case it found that implementation of a
> recommendation is not in the global public interest.
> 
> 
> 
> After the Los Angeles face to face meeting, and during the Dublin 
> meeting, the recommendations from our group greatly benefitted from
> the significant increase of Board member participation into our 
> deliberations. We strongly encourage the Board and its individual 
> members to maintain this high level of engagement.
> 
> 
> 
> Starting in early January, our group will increase the frequency of
> its plenary sessions to two per week. The calls will be open to
> all, and include topic based agendas to facilitate participation of
> interested parties. We hope that, beyond our Board liaison, the
> interested Board members will actively engage in this process.
> 
> 
> 
> Beyond this first role, the latest Board's comment on our Draft
> Report stressed the importance of some of its concerns by stating
> that, unless theses concerns are addressed, the Board  would have
> to consider "whether it believes the specifics of the
> recommendation meet the global public interest".
> 
> 
> 
> Understanding and taking into account these global public interest 
> concerns as part of our deliberations is a very high priority for
> our group. Chartering Organizations should be informed of any such
> remaining concern before they are requested to endorse our final
> recommendations. That is the reason why we had requested some
> clarification from the Board, through our Board liaison. We
> appreciate the response that was provided.
> 
> 
> 
> Beyond these clarifications, since the next few weeks will be key
> in finalizing our recommendations, we would like to offer the
> following practical suggestions to establish a constructive
> dialogue around these issues :
> 
> - the Board could appoint specific Board correspondents for each of
> the global public interest concerns raised. These correspondents
> would engage in the respective CCWG Accountability discussions in
> order to clarify the Board's concerns and provide rapid, of not
> real-time, feedback on whether potential refinements are addressing
> these concerns ;
> 
> - as the CCWG-Accountability finalizes each of its recommendation,
> the Board could hold short, regular (for instance, weekly) meetings
> to collectively confirm these views (through the Board liaison or
> these correspondents).
> 
> - should there be remaining concerns from the Board when a Report
> is sent to the Chartering Organizations, these could be documented
> in our Report, just like we currently document minority
> statements.
> 
> 
> 
> This approach would not only significantly enhance the cooperation 
> between the CCWG Accountability and the Icann Board. It would also 
> enable all involved parties, including the Chartering
> Organizations, to make a fully informed decision. Last, but not
> least, this approach effectively addresses the need to deliver a
> fully thought-through proposal while at the same time improving the
> timeliness of the delivery of a consolidated IANA Stewardship
> Transition to NTIA.
> 
> 
> 
> We are looking forward to working with you and the Board to a
> successful conclusion of these important efforts, and hope that you
> and the Board can take a few days rest over this holiday season.
> 
> 
> 
> Best wishes and happy holidays,
> 
> Leon, Thomas & Mathieu
> 
> CCWG Accountability co-chairs
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org 
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
> 
- -- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjAA7AAoJEAi1oPJjbWjptMIH/3a3b9gpln/PzSdItH7zSXBC
Iw+svEcaOFpiKrq+k4s70MkLD5u7VppYgRf9FK4G6eZunEfcEOdNQGeinR4smsB9
eUGUNFDTuZR0K2ThlDQ/XC7G94UepwIz1dHT4mVyvSOYV8j0NmJAhSM9kwOIwjvg
sq2g0kYGJLWLEb8104frSuI7JkRGyJEHnaTKchO5hx8v5/NYrtR+h4C0xEc0W0D0
AWcFTem04gHcj4KJhoEsUUYvYaDEbUGPvhsidVHaewk4p00p73bESajp1ulD1R8g
Rng2ByezpHfoKJgn3o+nGONWnGXUAXYWDgXQFQDDmODx6m5X1SDx8+RgMSRFby4=
=OkBe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----