[WP1] WP1 Work to Do - Now to July - Please Read

[Greg Shatan]

Alan,

I think you advance some interesting concepts.  As for AoC outcomes, I have
to admit I am not enough of a student of the AoC reviews to know whether
the outcomes have been affected by less than optimal membership.  I suppose
those who have participated in them would have a better idea.  As a general
matter, I am wary of any review that excludes entire organizations, though
it may be mitigated by working methods.  I could try to ask an IPC member
who has been a member of an AoC review team, but it is my understanding
that there has never been an IPC member on an AoC review team (though I
would be happy to be corrected).

Greg

On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
wrote:

>  I have concerns with this, but in the direction opposite to that of Greg.
> If every, or even some AC/SOs availed themselves of the full complement of
> allowed participants, these groups would grow to be a size that I am not
> sure is warranted. I would prefer to see a process by which we select
> people with knowledge and understanding of the issue to be discussed, AND a
> real willingness to do some hard work.
>
> I do not have the magic formula on how to do this, but it is crucial to
> good review outcomes.
>
> In response to Greg, are there examples in the AoC reviews that we have
> gone through where there are clear situations where the outcomes have
> suffered from the less than optimal membership rules? In the ALAC, we have
> not had the "perfect" balance from all five regions that we often desire,
> but I am far less sure that the OUTCOMES have been impacted due to the
> internal consultation that we do as well as the overall AoC RT's desire to
> solicit input widely.
>
> Alan
>
> At 03/07/2015 11:06 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote:
>
> Avri and I recommend this text  on creation of review teams for AoC
> reviews being brought into the bylaws.  We picked-up in the community
> voting weights that will be used for AC/SOs exercising their “community
> powers†here:
>
>  All reviews will be conducted by a volunteer community review team comprised
> of representatives of the relevant Advisory Committees, Supporting
> Organizations, and the chair of the ICANN Board.
>
> Up to 5 volunteers are welcomed from each AC/SO, to accommodate representatives
> of individual stakeholder groups.  If a review team conducts a consensus
> call on its report and recommendations, voting will be equalized among the
> participating AC/SOs.
>
> The group must be as diverse as possible.
>
>
> Thoughts on that?
>
> From: Jordan Carter
> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 11:29 PM
> To: "wp1 at icann.org"
> Subject: [WP1] WP1 Work to Do - Now to July - Please Read
>
> Dear all
>
> Thanks for the contributions on our work planning call for Work Party 1
> today. Please read this email carefully and add your thoughts.
>
> A separate note later today or early tomorrow will outline the WP1
> meetings we need to have between now and 14 July.
>
>
> We have three pieces of work to do by the end of the month. They are
> listed below, and then some detail fleshed out in the rest of this email,
> along with the call for volunteers...
>
> Three things need to be done:
>
> 1. Prepare draft content for our Second Public Comment report, for
> discussion at Paris & finalising by end month
>
> 2. Start the bylaws-preparation process, using the AOC reviews as a test
> case
>
> 3. Prepare responses to all the public comments from PC1
>
>
> On 1: the chunks of work we need to do are to prepare updated content that
> takes account of:
>
> - the feedback received in PC1
> - the discussions with the community and in our group at Buenos Aires
> - further analysis and refinement we make as WP1
>
> This draft material should be done in time for the Paris meeting, and so
> has to respect the document freeze on 14 July.
>
> We need to do this for the following areas, and we need a Lead Volunteer
> for each area:
>
> Community Mechanism - balance of power / votes / influence
> Community Mechanism - whether there is a Council, or just a vote counting
> mechanism
>
> Community Power - Budget/Strat Plan / Operating Plan
> Community Power - Blocking ordinary bylaws changes
> Community Power - Approving Fundamental Bylaws changes
> Community Power - Removal of individual Directors
> Community Power - Recall of the whole ICANN Board
>
> Affirmation of Commitments - inclusion of AOC reviews in bylaws
> Affirmation of Commitments - other matters (what happens to AOC, etc)
>
>
> Not on this list is the Model itself (empowered designators, empowered
> SO/AC) - my understanding is that the lawyers are being asked to develop
> material on this, and that it will be central to our meeting in Paris.
>
>
> If there are areas of work omitted above, please raise them ASAP.
>
>
> :: Call for Volunteers ::
>
> If you would like to volunteer to lead any particular piece of work for
> the above, please do so ASAP - by email to me, or to this email list.
>
> Ideally, there will be one volunteer for each of the lines above. I have
> some people who have agreed to be "voluntold" - Avri and Matt Shears are in
> this category. But for the start, free choice!
>
> The task will be to be lead writer on a tracked changes version of the PC1
> content, showing what you propose to change for the Second report.
>
> The approach asked is to:
>
> a) analyse the public comments and the discussions in BA
> b) propose draft text changes that take this into account
>
> The example Steve delBianco circulated earlier today is a way to do it.
>
>
> Your drafting will lead to discussion of your proposed content in WP1. We
> will do as much as we can to improve the drafts and get consensus, but we
> will debate all the material through in Paris is my current knowledge.
>
> On item 2 - bylaws drafting - Steve has started this process with the AOC
> and we will discuss this content on our next WP1 call.
>
> On item 3 - public comments replies - I propose that people take some
> account of this as they do the drafting work, and be prepared to spend some
> time on completing this task (responses to the comments we got in PC1)
> *after* the Paris meeting.
>
>
> I look forward to your thoughts as to any gaps in the proposed work, and
> to your volunteering excellence.
>
>
>
> cheers
> Jordan
>
> --
> Jordan Carter
>
> Chief Executive
> InternetNZ
>
> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
> jordan at internetnz.net.nz
> Skype: jordancarter
>
> A better world through a better Internet
>
> _______________________________________________
> WP1 mailing list
> WP1 at icann.org
>  https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WP1 mailing list
> WP1 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150705/3742d981/attachment.html>