[OFB-WG] ALAC Statement on Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) Final Report

Marita Moll mmoll at ca.inter.net
Thu Jul 30 13:37:32 UTC 2020


I am also okay with the editorial comments suggested although I have 
already voted.

Marita

On 7/30/2020 4:53 AM, Justine Chew wrote:
> I too have found myself in the situation of finding useful editorial 
> improvements after a statement has been issued for ALAC vote.
>
> While I didn't feel compelled to raise any for this particular 
> statement, since yours are of the editorial nature and don't change 
> the substance of the statement, I can support their inclusion as well.
>
> I would appreciate it if staff could coordinate with ALL the 
> penholders in finalising the copy on an urgent basis, and noting that 
> the ALAC vote is ongoing, all ALAC members should be informed accordingly.
>
> Thanks,
> Justine
> ------
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 15:54, Maureen Hilyard 
> <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com <mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thank you Sebastien. Im sure we can go ahead with Bastiaan's changes.
>
>     On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 9:27 PM Sebicann Bachollet
>     <sebicann at bachollet.fr <mailto:sebicann at bachollet.fr>> wrote:
>
>         Hello,
>         Thanks Bastiaan,
>         I agree that your suggestion are not substantive but will help
>         to understand better the document.
>         May we ask Joanna, Bastiaan and Ricardo with staff to finalise
>         the document before sending as a comment?
>         THanks all.
>         All the best
>         SeB
>
>         Sébastien Bachollet
>         +33 6 07 66 89 33
>         sebicann at bachollet.fr <mailto:sebicann at bachollet.fr>
>         @SebBach
>
>         EURALO Chair
>
>
>
>
>>         Le 29 juil. 2020 à 18:13, Bastiaan Goslings
>>         <b.goslings at gmail.com <mailto:b.goslings at gmail.com>> a écrit :
>>
>>         Thanks, Ricardo
>>
>>         Fyi: staff, who knew I was not going to be on the OFB call,
>>         asked me as co-penholder to incorporate potential comments
>>         from the group afterwards. Which meant I would have to listen
>>         to the recording, assuming it would be quickly available. No
>>         problem. Of course no one knew that the group would support
>>         the last version of the draft as is, but the request from
>>         staff did imply to me that we at least had some time to do
>>         a(nother) final review.
>>
>>         Anyway. I understand your point that, as there were no
>>         comments from the OFB WG, it was agreed to ask the ALAC to
>>         ratify the statement. I saw the message this morning, sent at
>>         2AM CEST.
>>
>>         I do not really have anything to add. I will leave it to
>>         others to decide whether my _editorial_ suggestions, which
>>         from my perspective can easily and quickly be incorporated
>>         before the deadline, are worth considering.
>>
>>         take care
>>         Bastiaan
>>
>>
>>>         On 29 Jul 2020, at 17:54, Ricardo Holmquist
>>>         <rihogris at gmail.com <mailto:rihogris at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Hi Bastiaan,
>>>         Yesterday, after the reading of the ATRT3 draft, there were
>>>         no comments, thus it was agreed it will be the final draft,
>>>         ready to be voted by ALAC. But, sure, you were part of the
>>>         drafting team, and we were supposed to wait for you to make
>>>         any arrangements after the OFBWG call. Of course there is
>>>         the rush to vote before friday.
>>>
>>>         Best
>>>
>>>         Ricardo
>>>
>>>         El mié., 29 jul. 2020 17:36, Bastiaan Goslings
>>>         <b.goslings at gmail.com <mailto:b.goslings at gmail.com>> escribió:
>>>         Thanks, staff.
>>>
>>>         A couple of comments, after going over the final draft
>>>         before I support ratification.
>>>
>>>         - Under point 1;
>>>
>>>         'With that, the ALAC supports the ATRT3 suggestion to
>>>         introduce changes to the current structure of reviews,
>>>         specifically by implementing a moratorium on launching any
>>>         new Organizational and Specific Reviews until it has made a
>>>         decision on this recommendation, as per Section 8 of the
>>>         report).’
>>>
>>>         I assume the ‘it’ referred to here is the ICANN board? As it
>>>         reads now, to me, it sounds like ‘it’ refers to the ALAC
>>>
>>>         As an alternative: ‘(…) , specifically by having the ICANN
>>>         board implement a moratorium (…) until it has made a
>>>         decision’ (etc)
>>>
>>>
>>>         - With regard to point 2:
>>>
>>>         This ('The ALAC fully endorses the recommendation’ (etc)
>>>         does not follow logically from the introduction above point
>>>         1 ('we advise the ICANN Board to:’ and then come the 3 points)
>>>
>>>         As an alternative: remove the ’The ALAC fully endorses’ and
>>>         replace with ‘Fully endorse'. You then get 'we advise the
>>>         ICANN Board to: (…)  2. Fully endorse’ (etc)
>>>
>>>
>>>         - With regard to point 3:
>>>
>>>         This ('The ALAC shares’ (etc) does not follow logically
>>>         either from the introduction above point 1 ('we advise the
>>>         ICANN Board to:’ and then come the 3 points)
>>>
>>>         As an alternative: remove the ’The ALAC shares’ and replace
>>>         with ’share’. You then get 'we advise the ICANN Board to:
>>>         (…)  3. share the ATRT3 Review Team’s approach’ (etc)
>>>
>>>
>>>         (To make it even more clear, the 'we advise the ICANN Board
>>>         to:’ could be added above both points 2 and 3 as well)
>>>
>>>
>>>         With regard to my point 2 and 3 remarks above, these of
>>>         course only apply if we indeed want to explicitly state ''we
>>>         advise the ICANN Board to’. If that is not the case, then we
>>>         can remove the 'we advise the ICANN Board to:’ above point 1
>>>         and replace the ‘1. Swiftly implement ATRT3 recommendation
>>>         to evolve both specific and organizational reviews as per
>>>         Section 8 of the final report'  with
>>>
>>>         ’The ALAC is of the opinion that the ATRT3 recommendation to
>>>         evolve both specific and organizational reviews as per
>>>         Section 8 of the final report should be swiftly implemented’
>>>
>>>
>>>         Hope this makes sense,
>>>
>>>         regards
>>>         Bastiaan
>>>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         OFB-WG mailing list
>>         OFB-WG at icann.org <mailto:OFB-WG at icann.org>
>>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ofb-wg
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         By submitting your personal data, you consent to the
>>         processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing
>>         to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>>         (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms
>>         of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit
>>         the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>>         configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
>>         delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a
>>         vacation), and so on.
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         OFB-WG mailing list
>         OFB-WG at icann.org <mailto:OFB-WG at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ofb-wg
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         By submitting your personal data, you consent to the
>         processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing
>         to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>         (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms
>         of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit
>         the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>         configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
>         delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a
>         vacation), and so on.
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     OFB-WG mailing list
>     OFB-WG at icann.org <mailto:OFB-WG at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ofb-wg
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
>     your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing
>     list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>     (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
>     Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the
>     Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>     configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
>     delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
>     and so on.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OFB-WG mailing list
> OFB-WG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ofb-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ofb-wg/attachments/20200730/527a840e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OFB-WG mailing list