[ccwg-internet-governance] Extended Public Comment on Principles for CCWGs

Marilyn Cade marilynscade at hotmail.com
Mon Apr 4 21:46:08 UTC 2016


Thanks, Judity. I have gone through the full document. For the CCWG-IG, I think that identifying that there should be flexibility for different modalities/purposesbut to be clear that these are likely to be unusual, and still some kind of 'activies/outputs' are required.For instance, in my examination of this issue, the periodic [3 per year + WSIS Forum organized session] are outputsand briefing the chartering organizations can take the form of a written summary from the co chairs
One thing we do need to do is to discuss that the ICANN staff and Board are expected to take into account, and listen to guidance, input, developed by a CCWG.  The Board allowed expenditures that the community did not support in the area of IG, and that the ICANN community kept finding out after the fact. That is what led to the creation of this WG.
I do think that the Board and senior staff should receive the views of the CCWG-IG. 


> To: ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> From: judith at jhellerstein.com
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 12:20:12 -0400
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Extended Public Comment on Principles for CCWGs
> 
> HI All,
> 
> Thanks for everyone's work on the draft framework. It reads very well. My 
> question is that it calls for groups to publish outputs and for these outputs to 
> go to the ICANN Board.  I was not sure our group is set up to give these type of 
> outputs that other CCWG's give. I can see us giving outputs and supplying 
> statements to different policy bodies but I had not envisioned that our outputs 
> would need to go to the ICANN board for approval.  Is this what this document is 
> saying?
> 
> I think we are a different type of CCWG than those on ICANN Transition or ICANN 
> Accountability. We are more of a group with shared concerns across 
> constituencies who want to work together to provide policy advice and education 
> on issues of Internet Governance. Perhaps we can discuss this framework and how 
> it affects us on our next policy call?
> 
> Best,
> Judith
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
> Hellerstein & Associates
> 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
> Phone: (202) 362-5139  Skype ID: judithhellerstein
> E-mail: Judith at jhellerstein.com   Website: www.jhellerstein.com
> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/
> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
> 
> On 3/29/2016 3:16 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > The Public Comment period for the CCWG-Principles draft has been
> > extended to 16 April 2016. We now have 19 days to submit comments:
> > https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-02-22-en.
> >
> > Kindest regards,
> >
> > Olivier
> > _______________________________________________
> > ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> > ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20160404/173c09f1/attachment.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list