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

Tue Aug 15 14:56:31 UTC 2017

Please note that the drafting team has now come together and it looks like
we will have a revised text for the call today.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:44 AM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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/f56b252b/attachment-0001.html>