[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review - draft responses to remaining charter questions

Daniel Dardailler danield at w3.org
Fri Jun 15 16:58:49 UTC 2018

Hello Marika, all

I won't be in Panama but in case the mechanisms are going to be 
discussed, let me again reinforce and explain my preference for #1, 
after reading these draft responses.

I only changed one thing in the document, editorial in nature, but 
important nevertheless: putting some emphasis (I used a bold font) on 
the word "and", between ICANN *and* the external charity (for mechanisms 
#2,3,4, to make it clear that all the requirements that are listed below 
it will have to be enforced on/in the external organization as well, 
which to me, amounts to at least 10% of added overhead within ICANN just 
to double-check that some specific new grant-related ICANN rules are 
applied correctly outside ICANN (because no matter how far a wrong 
decision was made, ICANN's status is at risk).

Since the number one paramount criteria is going to be the quality, and 
therefore the granularity, of the ICANN fiduciary control over these new 
spending's, the further away from ICANN mgnt, the higher the risk of 
things going bad.

In addition, other important criteria, such as global participation, 
global governance, transparency, accountability, etc., are already 
pilars of ICANN (or aimed-at for the skeptics) and will also have to be 
"transferred" (or studied/validated) to any outside organization doing 
the disbursing.

It's going to be very hard IMO to find an external organization/charity 
that would have the flexibility of adapting to all the new fiduciary 
requirements listed in these draft responses, and at the same time, 
which would already have all the higher level properties of being 
global, open, accountable, transparent, a bit internet savvy, etc.

On 2018-06-14 19:42, Marika Konings wrote:
> Dear All,
> The leadership team has worked on a first draft response to the
> remaining charter questions, reviewing information from the charter
> question templates that were developed at an earlier stage of our work
> (see https://community.icann.org/x/PNrRAw) as well as the input
> provided by external experts (see
> https://community.icann.org/x/BSW8B). Some specific issues/questions
> for CCWG consideration have been highlighted in yellow, but of course,
> input is sought on all aspects of the proposed responses. Please
> review this document and provide any comments and/or questions you may
> have in the google doc BY SATURDAY 23 JUNE at the latest. This will
> allow the leadership team to review your feedback and prepare
> accordingly for the CCWG session which will take place on Wednesday 27
> June from 15.15 – 16.45 local time (see
> https://62.schedule.icann.org/meetings/699541). For remote
> participation details, please see
> https://community.icann.org/x/6QQFBQ.
> To review the draft responses, please see
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/13Kbjnnflt0h5ZVkP57s2nP0trJyQCcuTfdWjzbgwc7k/edit?usp=sharing
> [1].
> Thanks,
> Marika
> _Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) _
> _Email: marika.konings at icann.org  _
> _ _
> _Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO_
> _Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses [2]
> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages [3]. _
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/13Kbjnnflt0h5ZVkP57s2nP0trJyQCcuTfdWjzbgwc7k/edit?usp=sharing
> [2] http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso
> [3]
> http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds

More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list