[CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-hr] Letter from the Board on Human Rights

[McAuley, David]

[Part of string deleted to make shorter]



This makes sense to me, Greg, especially the last bullet – would be nice to hear from Board on their assessment (presumably not yet stated) on the “Considerations” portion of the unified subgroup document.



Best regards,

David



David McAuley

International Policy Manager

Verisign Inc.

703-948-4154



From: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 5:10 PM
To: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
Cc: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com>; <ws2-hr at icann.org> <ws2-hr at icann.org>; McAuley, David <dmcauley at Verisign.com>; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Letter from the Board on Human Rights



I'm fairly confident that this is what the letter is saying:



The Board also expresses its support for the additional efforts [i.e., the considerations document] to complete a review of the items noted in WS1 Annex 12 to ensure they have been fully covered in the draft FOI, and to further inform the development of additional implementation recommendations to accompany the FOI [someone is supposed to develop additional implementation recommendations].



As part of those implementation recommendations, the Board is asking ICANN organization [i.e., staff] to conduct an impact assessment to understand how the implementation of the recommendations would impact the organization. [It appears that the staff is developing these implementation recommendations.] The Board encourages the CCWG [i.e., this Subgroup, primarily] to provide examples of how the FoI is to be implemented and the areas of work that the FoI is expected to impact to assist [the staff] with this work. This will be an important point of information for the whole of the ICANN community [i.e, the CCWG and the rest of the community via public comments and SO/AC approvals] in their deliberations of the final recommendations.



In other words:



*       The Board knows that we're working on the Considerations document.
*       The Considerations document will be used to develop implementation recommendations to accompany the FoI
*       Staff is developing these implementation recommendations.

   *    As part of that work, Staff is doing an impact assessment.

*       CCWG (really, this subgroup) needs to create examples of (1) how the FoI is to be implemented and (2) the areas of work that the FoI is expected to impact.
*       CCWG needs to give those examples to the staff,

   *    Staff will use these example in doing the impact assessment.

*       CCWG also needs to make these examples available to the entire ICANN community.

   *    Public comments and SO/ACs should take these examples, as well as the implementation recommendations (including the impact assessment) into account when deciding whether to approve the final recommendations.

*       Based on Niels' followup, at this point, rather than working on examples now, we can wait until we hear from the Board (and others) in the public comment on the initial recommendations.

Does that make sense?



(With regard to "examples," it should not be forgotten that the CCWG Charter says "In order to facilitate evaluation and adoption of its proposals, the CCWG-Accountability is expected to provide a detailed description on how its proposals would provide an adequate level of resistance to contingencies (“stress tests”), within the scope of each Work Stream." (emphasis added))



Greg

*




Greg Shatan
C: 917-816-6428
S: gsshatan
Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428
gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20170413/8eccfd76/attachment-0001.html>