<p dir="ltr">Hi,</p>
<p dir="ltr">Oh there is another one called PAF? May I know what that means please (lots of acronyms). That said, I am of the following opinion:<br>
- I don't see any need for such mini groups<br>
- A community forum should indeed be a forum and open to all those interested and not for representatives.<br>
- Such forum should hold during 1 of the ICANN public meetings to remove any cost implications<br>
- The need to exercise any community power should be based on the statements made by each community (after consultation with their respective communities, who would have participated in the community forum).<br>
- Such statements could then trigger a ccwg(that basically consists of the existing community leaders), who then compile high-level views on an issue to serve as the consensus voice of the entire community<br>
- The action/inaction of the board on such single statement would determine whether certain community powers would then be implemented.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Overall, the current way of communicating individual SO/AC views to the board needs to be maintained and the need to have a single view that could lead to exercising community powers should be an act of escalation. </p>
<p dir="ltr">What i have written above may not be a desirable solution but my point is for us to avoid de-fragmenting the community unnecessarily as it could increase likelihood of capture and reduce diversity of views.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 27 Jul 2015 9:28 am, "Matthew Shears" <<a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi<br>
<br>
Agree that having two entities is excessive - that said there are
some differences, as I understand them from the texts/mails:<br>
<br>
The ICA is supposed to "
<span>be
a forum where the use of any of the powers is
discussed across the whole ICANN community – <b>before</b> any of the powers are exercised."<br>
<br>
And the PAF is "</span>to bring
together board, staff and the SO/ACs in a public exchange of views
and
questions and comments about accountability issues - a sort of open
round
table, done at an ICANN meeting once a year"<br>
<br>
The first is about a potential exercising of a community power, the
second is a more general discussion on accountability matters.<br>
<br>
One could merge the two, create something with a more
appropriate name such as ICANN Accountability Forum (as assembly
sounds very top down and UN-like) and make it a once a year OR as
appropriate (when a community power is contemplated being used).<br>
<br>
Matthew<br>
<br>
<div>On 7/26/2015 8:09 PM, Alan Greenberg
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
Replies. Alan<br>
<br>
At 25/07/2015 10:53 PM, Jordan Carter wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Thank you Keith, Alan
for these
comments. I've attached some comments back on them. All very
helpful.<br>
<br>
I'm sorry for the confusion around the Public Accountability
Forum idea.
What I was trying to suggest was that that suggestion be
incorporated in
the ICA so two "things" aren't being created.<br>
<br>
From memory, the notion of the Public Accountability Forum was
to bring
together board, staff and the SO/ACs in a public exchange of
views and
questions and comments about accountability issues - a sort of
open round
table, done at an ICANN meeting once a year. The point was to
help build
mutual accountability across the ICANN system, not just vertical
accountability - helping to solve the "who watches the
watchers" conundrum.<br>
<br>
This could easily be done under the umbrella of the ICANN
Community
Assembly, perhaps with supplementary attendance or speaking
rights e.g.
for more of the Board, maybe the SO/AC leadership as well. <br>
<br>
But creating it as a separate beast seems pointless....<br>
<br>
cheers<br>
Jordan<br>
<br>
<br>
On 26 July 2015 at 06:54, Alan Greenberg
<<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>
> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>And a bunch of comments from me.<br>
<br>
</dd>
<dd>Alan<br>
<br>
</dd>
<dd>At 25/07/2015 09:03 AM, Drazek, Keith wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<dd>Thanks Jordan, this looks very good to me. I̢۪ve
made a few
proposed red-lined editsits in the attached, supported
by comments. Happy
to discuss further.<br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd>Regards,<br>
</dd>
<dd>Keith<br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd>From:
<a href="mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">wp1-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">
</a><a href="mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">
mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Jordan
Carter<br>
</dd>
<dd>Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 10:57 PM<br>
</dd>
<dd>To: <a href="mailto:wp1@icann.org" target="_blank">wp1@icann.org</a>;
Accountability Cross Community<br>
</dd>
<dd>Subject: [WP1] New section - ICANN Community Assembly<br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd>Hi all<br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd>I have taken the draft material from an older paper
about the ICANN
Community Assembly and pulled it into one place.<br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd>Please see attached and debate away! I've tried to be
clear on
its solely advisory nature, and have suggested that this
would be the
forum to use for the Public Accountability Forum
suggestion made by
advisors a while ago.<br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd> <br>
</dd>
<dd>best,<br>
</dd>
<dd>Jordan</dd>
</blockquote>
<br>
</dd>
</dl>
<br>
Content-Type:
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document;<br>
<u></u> <u></u>
name="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN
CommForum-KD-AG-JC.docx"<br>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<br>
<u></u> <u></u>
filename="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN
CommForum-KD-AG-JC.docx"<br>
X-Attachment-Id: f_icjw1ytv2<br>
<br>
Content-Type: application/pdf;<br>
<u></u> <u></u>
name="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN
CommForum-KD-AG-JC.pdf"<br>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<br>
<u></u> <u></u>
filename="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN
CommForum-KD-AG-JC.pdf"<br>
X-Attachment-Id: f_icjw1yu63<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
<a href="tel:%2B%2044%20%280%29771%20247%202987" value="+447712472987" target="_blank">+ 44 (0)771 247 2987</a></pre>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>