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

Alissa Cooper alissa at cooperw.in
Wed Jul 30 00:07:16 UTC 2014


Can you summarize where we are on this thread?


On 7/28/14, 4:42 AM, "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com> wrote:

>On read write, I don't have a problem as long as we use a method that
>can show changes and attribution.  It is very hard to find an edit or an
>omission when you don't know you are looking for one...
>On 7/27/2014 1:42 PM, Lynn St.Amour wrote:
>> Hi Patrik,
>> thank you for your work on this.
>> I agree with your suggestions.  More specifically, with respect to the
>>suggestion concerning read/write access to our documents for Members,
>>Liaisons and Support Staff  (Point 6 - Alternative D).   I support your
>>recommendation that all have read/write access to our documents.  I
>>believe we can and should trust everyone to respect our various roles;
>>and it should facilitate the work we all have to do.   In addition, all
>>contributions will then be better integrated and clearly visible.   We
>>can revisit this decision in the future, if it is not working to the
>>ICG's expectations.
>> Finally, thank you to all who helped kickstart this journey,
>>particularly Tracy Hackshaw who made a big effort to be with us at a
>>critical stage in the ICG's formation.
>> Best,
>> Lynn
>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 3:28 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se> wrote:
>>> All,
>>> 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
>>> When validating these four groups I found out a few things:
>>> Group A consists of the following people:
>>> ALAC	
>>> Jean-Jacques Subrenat
>>> Mohamed El-Bashir
>>> ASO	
>>> Hartmut Glaser
>>> ccNSO	
>>> Mary Uduma
>>> Xiaodong Lee
>>> Keith Davidson
>>> Martin Boyle
>>> GNSO	
>>> Wolf Ulrich Knoben
>>> Milton Mueller
>>> James Bladel
>>> gTLD Registries	
>>> Keith Drazek
>>> Jon Nevett
>>> GAC	
>>> Heather Dryden
>>> Manal Ismail
>>> Aratesh Kavouss
>>> Michael Niebel
>>> Jandyr Santos
>>> Joseph Alhadeff
>>> IAB	
>>> Russ Housley
>>> Lynn St Amour
>>> IETF	
>>> Jari Arkko
>>> Alissa Cooper
>>> ISOC	
>>> Narelle Clark
>>> Demi Getschko
>>> NRO	
>>> Adiel Akplogan
>>> Paul Wilson
>>> RSSAC	
>>> Lars-Johan Liman
>>> Daniel Karrenberg
>>> SSAC	
>>> 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
>>> 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.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>> 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