[Party1] WP1: Draft 5, with all Affirmation Reviews implemented as Bylaws changes

[Fiona Asonga]

Yes Jordan 

It can be a feature of our next meeting discussion. 

kind regards 

Fiona 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jordan Carter" <jordan at internetnz.net.nz> 
To: "Robin Gross" <robin at ipjustice.org> 
Cc: wp1 at icann.org 
Sent: Monday, March 9, 2015 7:45:29 AM 
Subject: Re: [Party1] WP1: Draft 5, with all Affirmation Reviews implemented as Bylaws changes 

Can this paper be a feature of our next WP1 meeting's discussion? 

cheers 
Jordan 

On 9 March 2015 at 10:03, Robin Gross < robin at ipjustice.org > wrote: 



Thanks very much for this discussion paper, Matthew. A few comments / suggestions redlined in the attached draft. 

Thanks again, 
Robin 




On Mar 8, 2015, at 1:05 PM, Matthew Shears wrote: 


<blockquote>


Dear all - attached please find an overview of other elements of the AoC that need to be further discussed within the WP as well as some suggestions that could be brought into the bylaws. 

Looking forward to your thoughts/comments. 

Matthew 

On 3/4/2015 5:38 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote: 

<blockquote>

Regarding Kavouss’ point about the ATRT assessing the 'effectiveness of the GAC’. 
A deeper read of ICANN bylaws tells me that ‘effectiveness’ is part of what the structural reviews are about. So while these structural reviews don’t actually assess the effectiveness of the GNSO, CCNSO, etc., they do make recommendations about how to improve the effectiveness. (see bylaws below) 


<blockquote>

Section 4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS 

1. The Board shall cause a periodic review of the performance and operation of each Supporting Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each Advisory Committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the Nominating Committee by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review. The goal of the review, to be undertaken pursuant to such criteria and standards as the Board shall direct, shall be to determine (i) whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and (ii) i f so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to improve its effectiveness. 




From: Steve DelBianco 
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 5:27 PM 
To: Jordan Carter, " wp1 at icann.org " 
Cc: Matthew Shears, Fiona Asonga, ACCT-Staff 
Subject: WP1: Draft 5, with all Affirmation Reviews implemented as Bylaws changes 

Draft v5 (attached) reflects the discussion/suggestions from our call on 4-Mar-2015. 

From: Steve DelBianco 
Date: Monday, March 2, 2015 at 3:56 PM 
To: Jordan Carter, " wp1 at icann.org " 
Cc: Matthew Shears, Fiona Asonga, ACCT-Staff 
Subject: WP1: Draft 4, with all Affirmation Reviews implemented as Bylaws changes 

here’s an updated doc for Matthew, Fiona, and me, where we are importing the Affirmation of Commitments Reviews into the ICANN Bylaws. The last 2 pages of this doc show proposed bylaws language for all 4 reviews. 

Matthew Shears also has draft language regarding other commitments from AoC that should be considered for import into ICANN bylaws. 
Best, 
Steve 



</blockquote>

<Proposals for incorporating additional elements of the AoC v1.docx> _______________________________________________ 
WP1 mailing list 
WP1 at icann.org 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1 

</blockquote>




</blockquote>




-- 
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 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150310/e6bd90e3/attachment.html>