<div dir="ltr">Good then we at least agree as to the body of the responses. But the current draft instructions seem clear that the entire response will remain confidential only to Westlake, not even to Staff:<div><br></div>
<div><div class="" style="margin-bottom:5px;font-weight:bold;font-size:medium;line-height:1.4;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Individual responses will not be made available publicly. Your input will remain confidential to Westlake as the independent reviewer, unless you are willing for your individual feedback to be shared for further analysis with the GNSO Review Working Party and supporting ICANN staff, please indicate in the consent box below</div>
<div class="" style="font-size:medium;line-height:1.5;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="width:1223px"><tbody><tr><td valign="top" style="font-size:small;line-height:1.5;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;width:1223px">
<div class="" style="width:1210.765625px;padding:0px;margin-right:4px"><input type="radio" class="" id="input_681940634_10_7846240613_0" name="input_681940634_10_0_0" value="7846240613_0" style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span class="" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;line-height:1.5;width:1px;height:1px;overflow:hidden"> </span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;line-height:1.5">I consent to the independent reviewer sharing my individual feedback with the GNSO Review Working Party and supporting ICANN staff for the express purpose of assisting with the 2014 GNSO Review.</span></div>
<div class="" style="width:1210.765625px;padding:0px;margin-right:4px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;line-height:1.5"><br></span></div><div class="" style="width:1210.765625px;padding:0px;margin-right:4px">We still may disagree as to whether names should be attached to the response by default. We in the IPC think giving an 'opt out' to public disclosure is sufficient protection for the relatively few people who would want to keep their name out of the purview of the Working Party and/or public. When evaluating the responses, it is important to know who is speaking.</div>
</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">Mike Rodenbaugh</div><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">RODENBAUGH LAW</div>
<div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087</div><div style="font-family:arial;font-size:small"><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">http://rodenbaugh.com</a> </div></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Gomes, Chuck <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com" target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Mike,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">If I am understanding you correctly, I wonder whether we are talking past each other. In advocating for confidentiality, I am not saying that responses should
be confidential but rather that the identity of the responder should be kept confidential by default. I think that the responses should be publicly available.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Chuck<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:<a href="mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">mike@rodenbaugh.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 29, 2014 1:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Larisa B. Gurnick; <a href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>; Richard G A Westlake<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks Chuck. In a nutshell, we think the survey responses will be very important, and should not generally be kept secret. In order for the Working Party to do its job, and for the public to properly weigh in on the recommendations of
Westlake and/or the Working Party, the underlying data generally needs to be made available. ICANN is an open and transparent organization, data and opinions are typically shared publicly for the benefit, input and buy-in of the entire community. Those respondents
who wish to maintain confidentiality of their response can elect to do so, and so that should address any confidentiality concern.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Mike Rodenbaugh<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">RODENBAUGH LAW<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">tel/fax: <a href="tel:%2B1.415.738.8087" value="+14157388087" target="_blank">+1.415.738.8087</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">http://rodenbaugh.com</a> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Gomes, Chuck <<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com" target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Mike,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">There has been pretty good discussion on the RySG list about this. Several people have asked for
the IPC rationale. I communicated that the main reason I heard was transparency. If you can add to that, I will share it with the RySG.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Chuck</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:<a href="mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">mike@rodenbaugh.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:27 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Larisa B. Gurnick; <a href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org" target="_blank">
gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>; Richard G A Westlake<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Chuck,<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Unless I missed it, I didn't hear anyone but you advocating for a change to the prior draft's default. After our London interaction, I figured the issue might be discussed by the
entire Working Party but I don't think that has happened; so clearly now is the time to have that discussion.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Mike Rodenbaugh</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">RODENBAUGH LAW</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">tel/fax: <a href="tel:%2B1.415.738.8087" target="_blank">+1.415.738.8087</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">http://rodenbaugh.com</a> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Gomes, Chuck <<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com" target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Mike,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Unless I missed it, I didn’t hear anyone but you advocating for the default being ‘public response’
but I forwarded the IPC position to the RySG list to see if any of our participants feel the same.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Chuck</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org" target="_blank">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org" target="_blank">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mike Rodenbaugh<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 28, 2014 7:38 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Larisa B. Gurnick<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>; Richard G A Westlake<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks Larisa. IPC notes that the confidentiality default has been changed from the previous draft, so that now responses by default will only be viewed by Westlake. I did not
note consensus in the Working Party for such a change. IPC's position is that the default should be public response, with the clear option for any respondent to choose their particular response to remain confidential. We see no justification for 'default
confidential' response, given the importance of this review and of ICANN's goal to be a transparent organization. The Working Party and the public should have access to the vast majority of the responses so we can adequately comment on Westlake's analysis
of them.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Curious to hear others' thoughts on this issue, and Staff/Westlake justification for making this change.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Mike Rodenbaugh</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">RODENBAUGH LAW</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">tel/fax: <a href="tel:%2B1.415.738.8087" target="_blank">+1.415.738.8087</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com" target="_blank">http://rodenbaugh.com</a> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Larisa B. Gurnick <<a href="mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org" target="_blank">larisa.gurnick@icann.org</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear All,<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Westlake Governance team modified the 360 Assessment based on feedback received last week. The revised 360 Assessment is available
<a href="https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GNSO360ReviewUATv3" target="_blank">here</a>. Please provide your final feedback and any additional comments from your constituencies <b><u>by August 1, 23:59 UTC</u></b>.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The responder now has the option of skipping the detailed questions pertaining to the GNSO Council, Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies. A responder who is directly involved
or is a close observer in any of these groups, will be able to answer detailed questions for as many groups as he/she would like.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The introductory language will be further refined to provide a clear roadmap of the different sections of the Assessment and the options available to the responder.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Please note that staff is in the process of completing a detailed proofing and editing to ensure proper spelling, capitalization, definition of acronyms, etc.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thank you for your feedback and commitment to making this assessment useful and informative.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i>Larisa B. Gurnick</i></b><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Director, Strategic Initiatives<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org" target="_blank">larisa.gurnick@icann.org</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="tel:310%20383-8995" target="_blank">310 383-8995</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>