[Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC

Tue Aug 15 14:44:15 UTC 2017

With apologies, I must miss today's meeting as I will be in the midst of a
college tour with my son at my alma mater.

The drafting team has not completed its work; I'm not as optimistic as
David that we will do so in the next few hours.

I agree that if we cannot come to consensus on a change, the current
version stands.  However, if we are going to "count noses," I see 3 public
comments urging a change to our consensus, all from the same advisory
committees.  On the other hand, I believe I see support for the consensus
from members of at least 3 different stakeholder groups (not "mostly from
one ICANN constituency").

While we should always fully consider and take into account public
comments, that does not mean that changes need to or should be made based
on that process. The burden of persuasion is on the comments and those
supporting them.  I for one am unpersuaded. I believe the logic and balance
of our current consensus still stands.

Finally, I believe that comparisons of particular decisions in different
working groups, subgroups, implementation teams, etc., are of limited
utility. The dynamics of such efforts are far too fact-specific and
issue-specific to be useful.

Greg

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:40 AM Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear All,
> As I emphasized at the last meeting, we need to agree or otherwise on any
> draft .If we do not agree will retain the orignal text,
> We can not waste any more time. It is clear the 4 people  (mostly from one
> single ICANN constituency persistantly oppose to any change to the initial
> draft in spite of clear comments received from three Governments  during
> Public Comments) do not want any further référence to Ruggie Principle than
> those contained in the initial draft which is strange. In IOT one  or two
> public comments( from private sector)  encouraged the chair of IOT and one
> more member of the group to oblige the group to agree with those comments
> with some minor changes but here is the reverse.
> We are discussing this issue for three meeting AND ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
> Regards
> Kavouss .
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:15 PM, McAuley, David via Ws2-hr <
> ws2-hr at icann.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Niels,
>>
>> The drafting team (presently as I understand it as being Tatiana, Greg,
>> Matthew, Anne, and myself) are and have been working on text but we all
>> have fairly heavy schedules this past week (as I know most in subgroup do
>> as well).
>>
>> We are hoping to have agreed text to send by 16:00 UTC today, perhaps
>> sooner.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> David
>>
>> David McAuley
>> Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager
>> Verisign Inc.
>> 703-948-4154
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] On
>> Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:12 AM
>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com>; ws2-hr at icann.org
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
>>
>> Hi Anne,
>>
>> Thanks for this, I reckon this means the drafting team hasn't come
>> together and wasn't able to provide us with alternative text?
>>
>> Anne, could you provide us with the old text, new proposed text and
>> redline version so we have very clear what do discuss?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Niels
>>
>> On 08/14/2017 11:47 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
>> > Thanks Niels.  Have not heard from anyone though I raised my hand to
>> > volunteer.  I propose adding the following language to whatever is
>> > determined for the changed language to accommodate the public comment
>> > from the governments:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > “To the extent that the foregoing assessment may impact gTLD policy,
>> > ICANN the organisation will review such mechanisms in accordance with
>> > the existing processes and protocols”.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
>> >
>> > Of Counsel
>> >
>> > 520.629.4428 office
>> >
>> > 520.879.4725 fax
>> >
>> > AAikman at lrrc.com
>> >
>> > _______________________________
>> >
>> > Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
>> >
>> > One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
>> >
>> > Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
>> >
>> > lrrc.com
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] On
>> > Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
>> > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:00 PM
>> > To: ws2-hr at icann.org
>> > Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda August 15 19:00 UTC
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear all,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I hope this email finds you all well. I am looking forward to discuss
>> > with you tomorrow the statement prepared by the draftig team.
>> > Unfortunately I haven't received the statement from them yet, but I am
>> > sure they are working hard on it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please find all proposed items for the agenda below and attached:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 1. Administrivia
>> >
>> > Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
>> >
>> > 2. Review proposed change by drafting team 3. Discussion approach to
>> > statement to CCWG 4. AOB
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > As always I'm greatly looking forward to the call, you questions and
>> > suggestions.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > All the best,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Niels
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Niels ten Oever
>> >
>> > Head of Digital
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Article 19
>> >
>> > www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > PGP fingerprint    2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
>> >
>> >                    643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > --
>> >
>> > This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
>> > individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of
>> > this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the
>> > employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment
>> > to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
>> > dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any
>> > attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>> > communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to
>> > the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any
>> > attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and
>> > confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the
>> > Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
>> > 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>>
>> --
>> Niels ten Oever
>> Head of Digital
>>
>> Article 19
>> www.article19.org
>>
>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>>                    678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ws2-hr mailing list
>> Ws2-hr at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ws2-hr mailing list
>> Ws2-hr at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-hr mailing list
> Ws2-hr at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20170815/58d555a3/attachment.html>