[Internal-cg] ICG Secretariat Round #2

James M. Bladel jbladel at godaddy.com
Thu Aug 14 14:38:01 UTC 2014

Just want to lend my support for the views expressed by Martin, Jon, Adiel
and Patrik.



On 8/14/14, 8:08 , "Martin Boyle" <Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk> wrote:

>Thanks Adiel for this:  I have no problems with the revised text and am
>grateful to you for picking up my points of concern.
>I share Jon & Patrik's views on the contracting point.  "It is the
>control over the secretariat and its actions that is the important thing"
>and "As long as the function reports directly to the ICG as Theresa
>suggested," I'd be happy to use ICANN's good offices as contracting
>agency.  As I've flagged before, I am not convinced that any other
>obvious intermediary contracting party would offer anything additional
>and could bring a mass of other problems.  (I use the word intermediary
>as, if I understand correctly, the money comes from ICANN and the service
>is entirely to the ICG.)
>Thanks again Adiel
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jon Nevett [mailto:jon at donuts.co]
>Sent: 14 August 2014 13:56
>To: Adiel Akplogan
>Cc: Martin Boyle; ICG
>Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG Secretariat Round #2
>FWIW I support using ICANN as the independent contracting entity for the
>secretariat per Theresa's email.  It seems nonsensical to me that we use
>ICANN to do certain administrative tasks, such as securing meeting rooms,
>translation services, travel support, etc., but we don't want to use
>ICANN as the contracting entity for the secretariat.  As long as the
>function reports directly to the ICG as Theresa suggested, I support
>going in that direction.  If we don't use ICANN, it would increase
>dramatically the amount of time and effort on us to fill the role, as
>well as prolong the time we would be without a secretariat.
>On Aug 14, 2014, at 8:11 AM, Adiel Akplogan <adiel at afrinic.net> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> I have uploaded an updated version of the secretariat document. There
>>is still one fundamental question we have to clearly answer:
>> - Are we still going to contract the secretariat via an Independent
>>Organisation (considering  the opinion shared by Theresa)?
>> If yes, who will that be? Will we need an RFP to select the third party
>>contractor? How  will we select that such entity that will be
>>sufficiently independent for every one?
>> Thanks.
>> - a.
>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 15:50 PM, Martin Boyle <Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk>
>>> Thanks Adiel, that all looks fine.
>>> My note on Chairs as opposed to Chair would be to allow whatever
>>>combination of Chair + co-/vice-chairs we eventually agree to, simply
>>>avoiding the bottleneck of a single point of contact.  But I'm fairly
>>> Narelle's language looks generally in the right direction.  I prefer
>>>the idea of clear separation of functions so that the Secretariat is
>>>not being distracted by fielding administrative tasks better performed
>>>by the ICANN team.
>>>>> - Co-ordinate the arrangement of face to face meeting venues along
>>>>>with related logistics  with ICANN and other third parties where
>>> This looks fine, but could we put the " where appropriate" at the
>>>start of the sentence?  Ie, "Where appropriate, coordinate the
>>>arrangement ... and other third parties?
>>>>> - Arrange ICG member travel, as and when required in conjunction
>>>>>with ICANN
>>> Can't this just be excluded as it is entirely the role of the ICANN
>>>>> - Liaise with ICANN for administrative matters as required by the
>>>>>ICG and Chair
>>> Liaising is nice wording!
>>> Cheers
>>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>Internal-cg mailing list
>Internal-cg at icann.org

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list