[ccwg-internet-governance] ICANN58 Block Schedule and High Interest Topic

Renata Aquino Ribeiro raquinolistas at gmail.com
Mon Dec 19 12:16:59 UTC 2016


Hi all

While it is important to discuss IGF2016, I agree the CCWGIG needs to be
thinking more broadly now and strategize.

When I joined this group, one of the first I joined in ICANN, I remember
there was always an effort to do an overview of IG spaces and plan actions.
It is time to bring that back but on an even broader perspective at a
public session, transition over, mandate renewed, what's next?

Best

Renata


2016-12-17 23:09 GMT-03:00 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>:

> I support Greg's idea. Open meeting, a good timeslot and ideas on how to
> improve  ccwg-ig.
>
> On 17 December 2016 at 12:34, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What about having our meeting in Copenhagen be an open meeting with a
>> good time slot, rather than planning a separate HIT?  CCWGs don't generally
>> put on HITs anyway....
>>
>> I agree that getting our house in order and our lease extended is our
>> primary focus.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 12:17 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, not doing a HIT is not hiding away . Not doing a HIT can lead
>>> to directing our resources to what should be done. For example, Nigel
>>> drafted a statement for CSTD on enhanced cooperation. Did we
>>> collaboratively come up with a document that he could use? no. Did we even
>>> discuss what we want to do with CSTD EC or whether we don't want to do
>>> anything? no.  People  spent way too much time on organizing the HIT last
>>> time as many others did. It was a great discussion. But what was the follow
>>> up? nothing. Please don't impose your interpretation upon us, we don't want
>>> to hide away but make things better for ccwg-ig and make it as it should be.
>>>
>>> On 17 December 2016 at 12:02, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> sorry, attacked... not attached. too many arthritis challenges to
>>> typing. TOOOO old challenges.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org <
>>> ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Marilyn Cade <
>>> marilynscade at hotmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 17, 2016 11:56 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> *To:* James Gannon; farzaneh badii
>>>
>>>
>>> *Cc:* CCWG
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] ICANN58 Block Schedule and
>>> High Interest Topic
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: 😊]
>>>
>>>
>>> I beg to disagree, but that is no surprise.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When attached, running away from a challenge is not the best strategy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We are a legitimate CCWG, after all, so let's address both challenges.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are we saying that we are not legitimate? so we are afraid of the
>>> questions being asked?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have seen this over and over. Someone challenges us. so we start
>>> withdrawing and hiding away.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In my view,  we are not ashamed or apologizing for the work we have
>>> done, and can do.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Right?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 17, 2016 11:49 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> *To:* farzaneh badii; Marilyn Cade
>>>
>>>
>>> *Cc:* CCWG
>>>
>>>
>>> *Subject:* RE: [ccwg-internet-governance] ICANN58 Block Schedule and
>>> High Interest Topic
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Farzi here from the peanut gallery, I don’t think now is
>>> the time for the CCWGIG to be putting effort in the area of creating HITs
>>> rather than focusing on what
>>>
>>> should be its primary task right now.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -James
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>> ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org]
>>>
>>> *On Behalf Of *farzaneh badii
>>>
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 17, 2016 3:52 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> *To:* Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Cc:* CCWG <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] ICANN58 Block Schedule and
>>> High Interest Topic
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I really don't think it's a good idea to have a HIT for Copenhagen. It
>>> takes our attention away from making ccwg ig relevant and it took a lot of
>>> time and effort last time to have a good session. I think resources should
>>> be directed towards
>>>
>>> making the ccwg ig a relevant active ongoing ccwg. Not a one session
>>> show. Let's have a working session instead of a HIT. If we want to inform
>>> people about igf and the like we can do it in out face to face meeting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 Dec 2016 09:50, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I know that some hate the idea of a round up, but IGF2016 and ICANN's
>>> continued engagement in IG meetings - such as IGF, CSTD, ITU WSIS and IPP;
>>> ECOSOC HLPF, WSIS Forum -- to me are an interesting
>>>
>>> discussion -- as a town hall - with the community.And, we should also
>>> assume some responsibility for explaining the SDGs and why ICANN has a role
>>> to play, alongside all other stakeholders.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Something like: consultation for ICANN's future engagement in the IG
>>> landscape and contributing to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals,
>>> within the mandate of ICANN. ICANN is a key player
>>>
>>> in the larger IG ecosystem, working within its mandate, but recognizing
>>> that it influences, educates, and contributes to the broader IG debates and
>>> policy discussions, along side other stakeholders.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think this is important to ensure that the Board WG, and the CEO and
>>> staff, hear from the broader community.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have no idea how many members of the ICANN community itself attended
>>> IGF2016.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am trying to do a "count" for the IGF-USA and the NRIs to identify the
>>> broader attendance, just for informational purposes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We could treat this like a true town hall again, with 4-5 roving mikes,
>>> something like was done at the WSIS+10/IG and SDG and prepare an outcome
>>> statement to be then circulated more broadly for
>>>
>>> public comment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Marilyn Cade
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:*
>>>
>>> ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org <
>>> ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org> on behalf
>>>
>>> of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 17, 2016 4:42 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> *To:* internet >>
>>>
>>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>>
>>>
>>> *Subject:* [ccwg-internet-governance] ICANN58 Block Schedule and High
>>> Interest Topic
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> the draft block schedule for ICANN 58 is out already. (see attached)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please see the information on the HITs from the last two ICANN Meetings
>>> below just received from Meetings staff.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *ICANN56 (Policy Forum)  |  Helsinki*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Headcount*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: Next Generation Registration Directory Services
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 215
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 208
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in
>>> All gTLDs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 190
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: Country and Other Geographic Names Forum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 182
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 5
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ICANN56 Wrap Up & Planning Ahead for ICANN57
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 149
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 6
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: Workload Scheduling and Management
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 109
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: Charter for the CCWG on Auction Proceeds
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 101
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 8
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cross-Community Session: Draft Framework of Principles for Future CCWGs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 65
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *ICANN57(AGM) |  Hyderabad*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Headcount*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> High Interest Topics session: Mitigation of Abuse in gTLDs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 338
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Update on WHOIS-Related Initiatives
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 261
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> DNS and Content Regulation  NCUC Group
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 197
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Exploring the Public Interest Within ICANN's Remit
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 190
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 5
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> High Interest Topic session: Underserved Regions in ICANN
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 166
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 6
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Q&A with ICANN General Counsel on the legal advice that ICANN receives &
>>> how that supports the ICANN mission
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 132
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How to do outreach within each SO/AC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 119
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 8
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Internet Governance Public Session
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 101
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You'll notice that our Internet Governance Public Session was the least
>>> attended session of the High Interest Topics. That said, it was late in the
>>>
>>> day, thus would have lost headcount.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The deadline for Hit Interest Topic Session proposals is on Friday 23rd
>>> Dec 2016, so we need to file a request this week. Any suggestions?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kindest regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Olivier
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>>>
>>>
>>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>>
>>>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>>>
>>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Farzaneh
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161219/73c89025/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OutlookEmoji-?.png
Type: image/png
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20161219/73c89025/OutlookEmoji--0001.png>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list