<div dir="ltr">Very sorry for the delay in getting back. My thoughts on engagement below:<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>DETAILS</div><div><br></div><div>* The docs I have read so far aren't actually structured to get public comment. They are a (long) report on what the group has done. So, fundamentally...</div><div><br></div><div>* What do you want people to comment on?</div><div><br></div><div>Do you want them to say: good luck, keep trucking.</div><div>Do you want them to give approval on the approach?</div><div>Do you want them to give approval of the broad plan?</div><div>Do you want comments on specific ideas?</div><div>Do you want people to say if they are opposed or in favor of specific aspects?</div><div>Do you want people to ask for more information on specific aspects?</div><div><br></div><div>You need to agree on exactly what kind of feedback you want. Otherwise you will get very little useful comment.</div><div><br></div><div>I would argue strongly that you need to create an entirely new document that is structured entirely around asking a few key questions. The main report can then be provided as a reference. </div><div><br></div><div>The report should have graphics, highlights, nothing at all about process and clear point for feedback including - importantly at this stage - the ability to ask questions that this group them provides specific answers to later on.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>OUTREACH ITSELF</div><div><br></div><div>I would say there are three main groups of people that you need input from. I would recommend coming up with a strategy for each. </div><div><br></div><div>1. Others in the transition process but not following this aspect or caught up in one particular aspect and looking for the bigger picture. As things stand, this is the group that is being most catered to. It is also the easiest group to cater for. But, as a result, it is not the group that you should be spending the bulk of your efforts chasing - they will come anyway.</div><div><br></div><div>2. The broader internet community. That means all the people that are interested but have given up trying to follow the process. It means people that go to ICANN meetings. And it means the IETF etc. At the moment, this group is poorly catered for. You might get a small number of people tuning in who are interested but have not been following the transition process closely. But as things stand, their eyes are going to rapidly glaze over. </div><div><br></div><div>There needs to be much clearer and simpler communication around what is being proposed, and what the group wants feedback on. Any and all descriptions about the process or the amount of work done, and so on have to be ditched. This group does not care and will not care. But they do care about the end result and they will want to be informed and then heard.</div><div><br></div><div>3. Washington DC. This is a vital group to inform, whether you like it or not. Without the accountability work, this whole thing could fall apart. Plus, if Washington is kept informed and its concerns are listened to, it would also be a vital ally in actually getting the proposals introduced. If Congress says something has to happen for transition, the DoC will take that on board and ICANN will just have to get over itself and do it. </div><div><br></div><div>My recommendation for outreach to DC would be to ask the people in this process that are well versed in how Washington works to take the broad goals of public comments and the report and come up with their own materials and strategy. Then come back to the group for approval. </div><div><br></div><div>If it were me, I would approach: the IP folk - who are extremely adept at talking to Congress and have all the necessary contacts; Steve Del Bianco, who is known and respected in DC in this field; and Phillip Corwin who also knows his way around.</div><div><br></div><div>Unfortunately I would suggest not including ICANN staff because of the difficult relationship they have in DC and their inability not to meddle, although it would smart and wise and maybe even useful to keep the staff involved in open and honest communication. </div><div><br></div><div>If you wish to get some press attention - which is often a very effective way to be heard in DC (The Hill, Politico, maybe Washington Post) - then I would recommend Brad White of ICANN in DC. He knows all the outlets and the reporters trust him in a way they do not trust ICANN's other staff.</div><div><br></div><div>A few very concise, very focused briefings on the hill (they also will not care in the slightest about the process only the proposed outcomes), some credible people talking - Mathieu for example, Del Bianco, maybe Keith Drazek - some follow-up, and this group in particular could be in a position to turn around the whole DC conversation. </div><div><br></div><div>So that's my advice for what it's worth. I hope it's not coming too late to be useful.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Kieren</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Mathieu Weill <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr" target="_blank">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Dear Colleagues, <br>
<br>
Thank you Kieren for these valuable comments. You rightly point out
that our plan was focusing on the materials and channels rather than
the stakeholders to engage with. I wonder if you or others have
ideas about our priorities in that regard. <br>
<br>
of course, SO and ACs, as well as the Board, are directly involved
in the process and are high priority. But beyond that ? Do you feel
it's more important to engage with stakeholders in Washington, in
internet governance circles, in the wider community ? <br>
<br>
And I am a firm supporter of *listening* (what they want to hear) as
the best engagement strategy. <br>
<br>
Best<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Mathieu</font></span><div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<div>Le 16/04/2015 00:22, Kieren McCarthy a
écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Re: outreach. What you have is good from the perspective of
getting the information across but it assumes that people will
find out about this, or will care enough to turn up to listen.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you want a broad range of voices, I would suggest that
the first step is to identify all those that you wish to
comment, and all those that have expressed interest in the
past and develop a system for actively approaching them. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And then ask them what *they* want to hear about - it may
be different from what you want to tell them.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also, I think it would pay off significantly if you spent
some time figuring out how to let people provide you with
feedback in the easiest possible way for them (i.e. not adopt
the default of emailed responses to a 20-page document).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hope these observations are helpful.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Kieren</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Jordan
Carter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Mathieu, all:
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think that this looks like a good plan at a high
level.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I guess to make it work will be necessary to get
the materials and scheduling available ASAP once our
First Public Comment Report is done.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Given our schedule, I wonder if 29 April is too
early for the webinar, but happy to be flexible about
it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>cheers</div>
<div>Jordan</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 10 April 2015 at 08:34,
Mathieu Weill <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr" target="_blank">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear
all,<br>
<br>
As discussed, we are moving this discussion to the
list as our time on the calls is pretty busy with
more urgent matters.<br>
<br>
We have put together a proposed engagement plan to
help disseminate and socialize the progress we
have made to date. Attached and below you will
find an outline of our suggested toolkit for your
consideration. The engagement plan was essentially
designed to help set the stage for our public
comment period and prepare for discussions to be
held at the ICANN meeting in Buenos Aires. As we
ran out of time on our call last week to discuss
the plan, we would be very grateful if you could
please share any objections or comments you may
have by 16/04.<br>
<br>
Webinars<br>
Webinars are an excellent tool to walk interested
individuals through our milestones and initial
conclusions. Together with a Q&A, it is a
great way to provide a comprehensive overview of
our mandate, activities and collect some initial
feedback to guide us through our next steps or
identify areas that need clarification, if any. We
suggest organizing a repeat session to accommodate
all timezones. Webinars are recorded, transcribed
and ICANN may also book language services, as
deemed needed. We suggest locking 09:00-10:30 UTC
and 18:00-19:30 UTC on Wednesday, 29 April.<br>
<br>
Interviews<br>
Interviews are a great way for us to share our
unique perspectives and to explain the process in
our own words. We suggest continuing this outreach
effort as work evolves.<br>
<br>
Videos<br>
We suggest creating a video which would be a
compilation of pods assembling storytelling
information and progress updates using, among
other things, excerpts from interviews,
nteractive graphics to facilitate and deepen
understanding of our work and of how it is bridged
to other processes. The Xplane team would help
translate the process into graphics. The video
could be a good way to reach a broader audience.<br>
<br>
Mailing-List<br>
We would like to suggest setting up a mailing-list
where anyone would be in a position to send
feedback or comments on an ongoing basis. This
list would be an additional avenue for the
community to submit feedback. We suggest kicking
this off after our public comment closes to allow
for continuous feedback. This is a tool that has
been very useful in some processes: the ATRT for
instance.<br>
<br>
Members<br>
Activities led by members of the CCWG to update
their respective memberships (and beyond) are of
essence in socializing the work of the CCWG and
Cochairs recognize all the efforts that are being
conducted. It is a key component of the engagement
plan altogether. Sharing discussions held with
your communities and flagging issues that were
brought up – if any – will help us prepare for the
public comment period and proactively unearth some
of the issues and concerns that might be raised to
address them before our report is issued.
Receiving this information will help us get a
sense of what will be problematic and optimize the
outcome of our public comment period.<br>
<br>
We look forward to your feedback.<br>
Thanks,<br>
Best regards<br>
Mathieu<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
*****************************<br>
Mathieu WEILL<br>
AFNIC - directeur général<br>
Tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006" value="+33139308306" target="_blank">+33 1 39 30
83 06</a><br>
<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr" target="_blank">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</a><br>
Twitter : @mathieuweill<br>
*****************************<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<span><font color="#888888">-- <br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">Jordan Carter<br>
<br>
Chief Executive <br>
<b>InternetNZ</b><br>
<br>
04 495 2118 (office) | <a href="tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649" value="+6421442649" target="_blank">+64 21
442 649</a> (mob)<br>
<a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>
<br>
Skype: jordancarter<br>
<br>
<i>A better world through a better Internet </i><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</font></span></div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
*****************************
Mathieu WEILL
AFNIC - directeur général
Tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006" value="+33139308306" target="_blank">+33 1 39 30 83 06</a>
<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr" target="_blank">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</a>
Twitter : @mathieuweill
*****************************
</pre>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>