[Internal-cg] Participation in ICG - 6 points to reach consensus on

Patrik Fältström paf at frobbit.se
Thu Jul 24 19:28:27 UTC 2014


I have investigated who are on the mailing list, and also asked ICANN Staff to provide a list of the participants in the ICG work. When I compared the two lists, I found some differences, and the difference is that more people are subscribed to the list than what the lists I received from ICANN contained.

This email contain my findings and have 6 decisions/action points at the end.

The list I got from ICANN contained four groups of people:

A. Members of the ICG

B. Liaisons to the ICG (from ICANN Board and IANA)

C. Support Staff (from ICANN)

D. Other people (on mailing list but not on the list I got from ICANN)

The main reason for investigating this is to understand who should get read/write access to our documents. Everyone do get read access of course.

When validating these four groups I found out a few things:

Group A consists of the following people:

Jean-Jacques Subrenat
Mohamed El-Bashir

Hartmut Glaser

Mary Uduma
Xiaodong Lee
Keith Davidson
Martin Boyle

Wolf Ulrich Knoben
Milton Mueller
James Bladel

gTLD Registries	 
Keith Drazek
Jon Nevett

Heather Dryden
Manal Ismail
Aratesh Kavouss
Michael Niebel
Jandyr Santos

Joseph Alhadeff

Russ Housley
Lynn St Amour

Jari Arkko
Alissa Cooper

Narelle Clark
Demi Getschko

Adiel Akplogan
Paul Wilson

Lars-Johan Liman
Daniel Karrenberg

Patrik Fältström
Russ Mundy

Group B contains:

Board Liaison	 
Kuo Wei-Wu

Dedicated IANA staff liaison expert
Elise Gerich

Group C and D is suggested by ICANN to be consolidated and trimmed to the following five people:

Theresa Swinehart -- responsible at ICANN for both processes (NTIA IANA Stewardship Transition and ICANN accountability). She is on in her role as ICANN being the facilitator of the process.

Ergys Ramaj and Alice Jansen -- core support to the Coordination Group to provide whatever is needed to the Coordination group including meeting support, liaising with the interpretation and translation services, meetings team, IT teams, and any other logistical and administrative support.

Jim Tengrove, assisted by Hillary Jett, are responsible for ICG-related Communications, including updates to the website.

In addition, these four people that are (or have been) subscribed are:

Tracy Hackshaw -- interim appointed GAC member, who following the ICG decision to accept all 5 proposed GAC members, was removed from the mailing-list this weekend.

Sam Dickinson -- is not ICANN staff, but was engaged and paid for by ICANN for the purposes of the London meeting and any minutes, writing, or other support.

Jamie Hedlund and Grace Abuhamad which are back-ups to the core contact Team.

Now to the issues, with suggested actions where appropriate:

1. Members and liaisons to ICG

My conclusion on the process is that there is a difference between members of the ICG and Liaisons.

When we need to come to consensus about something, the consensus should be among the members, not members+liaisons. We can solicit advice and opinions from the liaisons, but they should not otherwise be involved in consensus gathering or writing the group’s output. I think it is inappropriate for people who are employed by ICANN or who have fiduciary responsibility to ICANN to be otherwise involved in discussions and decisions about the future of the oversight of one of the ICANN departments.

I do understand this was not explicitly discussed in London.

Suggestion: When consensus is to be reached, consensus is only among members (not members+liaisons).

2. Support staff

Until CG have a secretariat in place, I think the current set of staff support (Theresa, Ergys, Alice, Jim and Hillary) have proven to work effectively, on our request, and can very well continue to function as the interim secretariat for ICG until further notice.

Suggestion: We accept the proposal from ICANN to until further notice from ICG continue with this set of support staff: Theresa, Ergys, Alice, Jim and Hillary.

3. Interim appointed GAC member

Tracy is now removed from the list as GAC has appointed the five members.

Suggestion: The IGC thank Tracy for the ability to participate.

4. Minutes of our meeting

Sam Dickinson has been taking minutes from our first meeting. ICANN has asked ICG whether we do think that was useful and whether we are interested in similar needs in the future. As we have not resolved our ideas with a secretariat yet, and we are still (at least myself) digesting minutes from first meeting, I think having a discussion on future minutes is premature.

Suggestion: We postpone discussion on minutes and otherwise record taking of our future meetings to the discussion on the Secretariat.

Suggestion: Until minutes from first meeting are complete, Sam Dickingson should be treated as support staff (together with Theresa, Ergys, Alice, Jim and Hillary).

5. ICANN backup contacts

As noted above, Jamie Hedlund and Grace Abuhamad are on the mailing list as backup contacts. ICANN has suggested that as the ICG is now up and running, they are removed from our mailing list and otherwise special treatment compared to other ICANN staff. In fact, they have as far as I understand already been removed from the list already.

Suggestion: We support ICANN in this proposal, thanks Jamie and Grace for their ability to help, and I validate the situation that they have been removed from the mailing list and that way got special treatment compared with other ICANN staff.

6. Write access to our documents

Everyone is to be given read access to our documents. Question is who should get read/write access.

We have a number of alternatives here, and which one we choose depends on what answers we get on the questions above.

Alternative A: Members only

Today members of ICG do have write access, and update of documents there depends on members doing explicit actions.

Alternative B: Members + liaisons

To make feedback loop from liaisons easier, we also give write access for liaisons. This do give ability for liaisons to write in documents, which might be preferable for example in the form of change tags in Word documents.

Alternative C: Members + Support Staff

By letting support staff write to documents members will be relieved from the task of updating documents and otherwise do purely administerial tasks.

Alternative D: Members + Liaisons + Support Staff

A merge of alternative B and C. In reality it implies (given my suggestion on issue 5 above finds consensus in ICG) that all members of this mailing list do get read/write access to the documents.

Suggestion: Alternative D, i.e. all Members, Liaisons and Support Staff get read/write access to our documents.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140724/92aa02a8/signature.asc>

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list