[ccwg-internet-governance] Action Items re: Organisation of an IGF Workshop (was: Re: CCWG-IG call of Thursday, March 28)

sivasubramanian muthusamy 6.internet at gmail.com
Mon Apr 15 15:18:49 UTC 2019


Dear Olivier,

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 3:42 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> this is to let you know that due to not having a consensus on the topic of
> submitting a proposal for an IGF Workshop, we have ended up not submitting
> a workshop proposal for IGF. I agree with Keith's and Julf's concerns that
> we have left this too late to have a polished proposal that gains consensus.
>
> Whilst I agree that we need to address workshop proposals at an earlier
> stage in order to obtain more buy-in from the different parts of ICANN, the
> late stage discussions are mostly caused by participants not paying
> attention to a topic until we are in the final deadline stage. With all of
> the other priorities that we have, this is somehow normal.
>
> That said, I would like to kindly ask you that in the future, we address
> deadlines earlier than just a week before the deadline is due.
>
> Coming back to the current workshop topic proposal, last week I got in
> touch with SSAC and RSSAC leadership and neither appeared to be keen to be
> involved - possibly because none of their participants are currently
> planning to attend the IGF.
>
> The next paragraph I make in my personal capacity:
>


> With ICANN pulling back from supporting members of the Community in
> attending the Global IGF and indeed many other events, volunteers
> increasingly appear simply not able to self-fund activities that they would
> undertake pro-bono to help with ICANN's image and explaining ICANN's
> message. The lack of understanding of some parts of our community, that
> coordinated engagement with these Global events outside of the ICANN bubble
> is very important indeed, is an ongoing concern for me. ICANN risks
> becoming an obscure, closed community with its own processes and own
> language, erecting walls for participation and rendering itself, like all
> closed communities,
>

+1 This is timely observation. There is a certain degree of insistence from
the domain business sector to restrain alternate points of view, and to
contain discussions from expanding to larger Internet forums where new
approaches and solutions may be examined with greater fairness. The
artificial limitations on ICANN's mission serve to perpetuate the
imbalances. Walls are erected, often by design, seen and unseen, that
contain participation and restrain the free flow of ideas making the ICANN
multi-stakeholder process increasingly closed. ICANN Multi Stakeholder
process is meant to evolve further, as a model to be emulated beyond the
DNS.  Narrow concerns slow down the process of building trust.

(sent with a request to the list coordinator and Community staff
coordinators to draw attention to this message to the list and a previous
message replying to Keith, still held in moderation. )

Sivasubramanian M


eventually obsolete.
>
> Chair hat back on:
> Not participating at the IGF is not the end of the world and this group
> has a lot of work on its plate. We need to prepare for our F2F meeting with
> the Board Working Group on Internet Governance at the Marrakesh meeting.
> Please suggest topics for our discussions then. As a kind reminder, the
> Marrakesh meeting being a shorter, 4-day policy forum, we have only had
> traditionally one face to face meeting and have skipped the Public Meeting.
> There simply is no available slot in the very tight schedule.
>
> Kindest regards,
>
> Olivier
>
> On 14/04/2019 09:35, Lori Schulman wrote:
>
> I agree with Marilyn.  ICANN should always submit thoughtful proposals
> especially if ICANN is to maintain its place as a though leader in internet
> governance.  My issue is that this proposal needed a simple project plan so
> that we could assign someone to write narrative, someone to confirm
> speakers, someone to find resources to link to, etc. so we have a
> compliant, cohesive proposal.  We aren’t there with this concept and I
> don’t think that we will be unless 1 person jumps in now  for each of the
> tasks that I have described above and we pull this out of our hats.
>
>
>
> In terms of vetting, I do recall that we agreed that it is impractical to
> have all SO/AC’s vet but we should have a proposal in good enough form that
> we can show to various subject matter experts, etc. within our community
> for feedback.
>
>
>
> I am not in the position to manage this last minute proposal as I will be
> in transit most of today and I am on CET time.   I won’t be home until  at
> least 9 pm CET and this is due at 1 am CET if I recall.
>
>
>
> What I am willing to do is volunteer now to coordinate whatever the next
> proposal is and pass on this one.  I am also willing  do a review /edit as
> soon as I am home if some else takes the lead in the next 6-8 hours.
>
>
>
> Lori
>
>
>
> Lori S. Schulman
>
> Senior Director, Internet Policy
>
> *International Trademark Association (INTA)*
>
> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ccwg-internet-governance
> <ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org>
> <ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Johan
> Helsingius
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 13, 2019 9:02 PM
> *To:* ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Action Items re: Organisation
> of an IGF Workshop (was: Re: CCWG-IG call of Thursday, March 28)
>
>
>
> On 13-04-19 16:52, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
>
> > With 24Hr to go until the deadline, is this the general feeling in the
> > group?
>
> I definitely agree with Keith.
>
> Julf
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing listccwg-internet-governance at icann.orghttps://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/20190415/cedd6ba8/attachment.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list