[ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: proposal for charter ( for discussion) submitted today the brasil input wg
kstubbs at afilias.info
Wed Dec 11 17:46:16 UTC 2013
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: proposal for charter ( for discussion) submitted today the
brasil input wg
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 12:45:13 -0500
From: Ken Stubbs <kstubbs at afilias.info>
To: GTLD Registries <regycon at googlegroups.com>
* Added by Rafik Dammak
<https://community.icann.org/display/%7Erafik.dammak>, last edited
by Rafik Dammak
<https://community.icann.org/display/%7Erafik.dammak> on Dec 11,
2013 (view change
Go to start of metadata
What is the problem to be solved?
Prepare for ICANN-community participation in the upcoming meeting in Brazil
How does not solving this problem get in the way of achieving the
The ICANN community might miss opportunities to contribute to the dialog
and outcomes of the meeting. Also, not involving the ICANN community in
the preparation of this meeting will make it impossible for this to be a
community-led, bottom up preparation process.
What value does the organization gain from solving this problem?
Engage in a bottom-up led conversation to advance the agenda articulated
in the Montevideo Statement
What is the chronology of the situation - how did we get here?
Idea of CCWG floated in the early-morning community meeting at ICANN48
On Thursday, ALAC and NCSG create a working group which the whole ICANN
community is invited to join.
What alternatives to doing this project have we explored?
The alternative is to NOT get involved as a community in the Brazil
meeting nor the 1net coordination. This risks having parts of the
community involved in an unstructured way thus bringing an imbalance to
the input provided by the ICANN community in the 1net process.
All Stakeholders at ICANN.
Who will be affected by the problem?
Absolutely everyone. ICANN's model is at risk.
ICANN policy staff - from two perspectives: support and policy-input
ICANN senior staff - from two perspectives: strategy and goal alignment,
All ICANN AC/SO's and stakeholders group/constituencies within them may
have an interest.
Potential for including groups that are not part of ICANN. Suggestion
that the different SO/AC/SGs should reach out to their respective
communities outside ICANN and let them know this work is taking place,
channeling any of their concerns via them as their representative.
Have they been involved sufficiently up to this point?
There is a sense of being left in the dark that is quite prevalent in
the community right now. This effort presents an opportunity to broaden
engagement and make the process more transparent.
Should they be brought in to the project? When?
While there is a small risk of too many voices causing confusion, the
posture of this effort is that broad engagement and participation are
welcome. Smaller groups can be formed if things become unwieldy example
:a kind of pyramidal structure where there will indeed be splinter
groups or sub-working groups that will come back to the wider group to
To what degree do they share the belief that this is a problem
that needs to be solved?
Broad agreement that the ICANN community needs to participate
effectively in the Brazil meeting
Who ought to 'champion' this project?
As this is a cross-community effort, AC/SO/Constituency leadership
To whom should the project team report?
Facilitators who will help with the communication of information between
the various groups & the Board & Staff. Co-Chairs who will direct the
Do we need a Steering Committee to provide resources and resolve
Yes -- include AC/SO/Constituency chairs and staff leaders (at least one
from policy staff and one from senior staff). The goals are speedy
formation, infrequent interventions and nimble/helpful response when needed.
Scope, Size and Perspective
What written definition clearly distinguishes between what is inside
this project, and what is outside?
Discuss logistical questions related to attending and participating in
the Brazil meeting
Identify representatives to attend the meeting
Develop mechanisms whereby in-person participants can inform, and obtain
guidance from, remote participants during the course of the meeting
start creating position papers & put them on a WIKI & then from these
position papers, see what commonality the different writers have.
Provide a point of contact between ICANN and the broader 1Net initiative?
Out of scope
Provide input to the Internet Governance Strategic Panel
What is the level of detail and precision involved in this
effort - is this a sweeping global effort (like a vision or
strategy) or is this a project to produce specific outcomes
(like install a system, or build a house)?
This is a narrowly-focused effort to prepare the ICANN community for a
new meeting that is a few months away. this group should spend most of
its time on the content -- certainly not finding answers, but certainly
finding the right questions to launch into the debate that will take
place in Brazil.
Goals & Objectives
What tangible, deliverable things do we want to see when this project is
To convey message from the ICANN community to Brazil meeting about
common positions and also diverse opinions from ICANN groups regarding
the issues to be covered by the meeting
This project will provide ICANN with clear positions that it will be
able to hold at the Brazil Summit thus parrying attacks on the
How do we know when the project is done?
This effort will conclude shortly after the end of the Brazil meeting
Critical Success Factors
What things do we need to do well in order for this project to succeed?
Remain focused on the narrow scope of preparing for Brazil
Try to put aside historic rivalries and mistrust
Focus more on the message and less on positions/logistics/politics.
Work to a short-interval schedule
Focus the work on email lists, wikis and other asynchronous tools. Use
periodic teleconferences sparingly and wisely
Build relationships and trust, both inside and outside of ICANN
Preferred Problem-Solving Approach
These questions are the socket into which a work plan is inserted.
Revisit them once the broad outlines of the charter are agreed.
Who will do what tasks, with whom, by what date?
What are the intermediate milestone events and deliverables that we can
use as checkpoints to monitor the progress of the project?
Are they more than 1 or 2 weeks apart?
Do we need more (or fewer) tasks and milestones to keep the project
under a reasonable level of control?
What's the mechanism for getting things back on track if the
project is missing key dates?
setting a roadmap
Write a comment...
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
<http://www.avast.com/> protection is active.
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ccwg-internet-governance