[atrt2] PDP - Discussion with ATRT2 10

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Sat Aug 10 18:47:34 UTC 2013

>From: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com>
>To: 'Alice Jansen' <alice.jansen at icann.org>, 'Michele Neylon - Blacknight'
>         <michele at blacknight.com>, 
> <rickert at anwaelte.de>, <mike at haven2.com>, "'Chuck
>  Gomes'" <cgomes at verisign.com>, <jbladel at godaddy.com>, 'Paul Diaz'
>         <pdiaz at pir.org>, 
> <jeff.neuman at neustar.biz>, 'Avri Doria' <avri at ella.com>,
>         'Alan Greenberg' <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
>CC: 'Marika Konings' <marika.konings at icann.org>, "'Larisa B. Gurnick'"
>         <larisa.gurnick at icann.org>, 'Charla 
> Shambley' <charla.shambley at icann.org>,
>         'Brian Cute' <bcute at pir.org>
>Subject: R: PDP - Discussion with ATRT2
>Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 00:07:18 +0200
>Sorry, I will be unable to make the 14 August 
>call, I will be available only in the late 
>evening (CET) that is not one of the option offered.
>However, I would like to contribute to the 
>discussion prior to the call. I have no problem 
>in having my comments posted publicly.
>I will articulate a better contribution 
>tomorrow, but for the time being I would like to make the following points:
>·         Agree with Mikey on incentivating more participation by new people
>·         The charter has to be defined clearly, 
>but not only – it has to be very clear what will 
>be the process after the conclusion of the WG 
>(in the VI-WG we spent hours to discuss “what 
>will happen next if we don’t reach consensus” – 
>I’ll elaborate in a follow up post on why this is important
>·         On “complicated” WGs, resources are 
>necessary, still quoting the VI experience, much 
>progress has been made in a F2F meeting
>·         As part of the GNSO Review, we stated 
>that some resources should be made available for 
>the WG Chairs – this is important when the WG is 
>“complicated” – I am sure that in the final 
>report of the GNSO Review WG we mentioned 
>training for the Chairpersons, use of facilitators, and so on
>·         To the best of my knowledge, there are 
>“lessons learned” sessions, but there has never 
>been an effort to share experiences among WG 
>Chairs or record for the upcoming WGs what went 
>OK and what went wrong in previous WGs, 
>successful tricks used, approaches that brought 
>deadlocks, a.s.o. – much is left to the “oral 
>tradition” and to the memory of the WG members
>·         For the “certain stakeholders have not 
>been able to adequately participate” issue, I 
>have my own opinions, it is also linked with the 
>“chair warming” issue – since this comment is 
>going to be public, I will wait until my mind is 
>fresh and I will be able to articulate my thoughts in a politically correct way
>Please be aware that I have not been active in 
>the PDP process for more than one year, and 
>therefore I might have raised points that are 
>currently incorrect or superseded by events.
>Best regards,
>Da: Alice Jansen [mailto:alice.jansen at icann.org]
>Inviato: mercoledì 7 agosto 2013 15:04
>A: Michele Neylon - Blacknight; 
>rickert at anwaelte.de; mike at haven2.com; Chuck 
>Gomes; jbladel at godaddy.com; Paul Diaz; 
>roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com; 
>jeff.neuman at neustar.biz; Avri Doria; Alan Greenberg
>Cc: Marika Konings; Larisa B. Gurnick; Charla Shambley; Brian Cute
>Oggetto: PDP - Discussion with ATRT2
>Priorità: Alta
>Dear All,
>It is my understanding that my colleague Charla 
>has been touched with you to schedule a call 
>with the Second Accountability & Transparency Review Team (ATRT2).
>  The ATRT2's activities are focused on 
> paragraph 9.1 of the AoC where ICANN commits to 
> maintain and improve robust mechanisms for 
> public input, accountability, and transparency 
> so as to ensure that the outcomes of its 
> decision-making will reflect the public 
> interest and be accountable to all 
> stakeholders. As part of its mandate, the ATRT 
> has decided to review the effectiveness of 
> ICANN Generic Names Supporting Organization 
> (GNSO) Policy Development Process (PDP) and so 
> determine whether the current GNSO PDP process 
> satisfies the needs of the multi stakeholder 
> model and Internet users. Given your experience 
> and expertise, the ATRT2 is interested in 
> hearing your thoughts and wishes you to share 
> your unique perspective with them.
>The ATRT2 has a face-to-face meeting scheduled 
>for next week (14–15–16 August) in Los Angeles. 
>Would you be available - tentatively on 
>Wednesday, 14 August - to join their session 
>remotely? Please confirm your availability via 
>by Thursday, 8 August – COB.
>The Review Team has received your request for 
>preparatory materials. Rest assured that we will 
>provide you with more information as soon as available.
>I look forward to reading your doodle poll 
>entries and thank you for your help. Please let 
>me know if you have any questions or concerns.
>Very best regards
>Alice Jansen
>Strategic Initiatives Manager
>Rond Point Schuman 6, Bt.1
>B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
>Office: +32 289 474 03
>Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56
>Skype: alice_jansen_icann
>Email: <mailto:alice.jansen at icann.org>alice.jansen at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20130810/756bb08a/attachment.html>

More information about the atrt2 mailing list