[Ws2-ombudsman] FW: [Ext] Re: Ombudsman Assessment: RFP Overview

Wed Dec 21 16:01:42 UTC 2016

I have reviewed the document and the comments so far. I see nothing that jumps out at me that conflicts with my role or framework. In official documents, I refer to the Office as the Office of Ombudsman as it is identified in the Bylaws. I will keep an eye open for the final draft before it goes back to Lars.

Regards all… Herb

Herb Waye
ICANN Ombudsman

https://www.icann.org/ombudsman
https://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
Twitter: @IcannOmbudsman

ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior:
https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/expected-standards-22aug16-en.pdf

Confidentiality
All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint

From: <ws2-ombudsman-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 8:59 AM
To: Klaus Stoll <kdrstoll at gmail.com>
Cc: "ws2-ombudsman at icann.org" <ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ws2-ombudsman] FW: [Ext] Re: Ombudsman Assessment: RFP Overview

Klaus,

I added  "deemed relevant by ombuds sub group and SO/AC". Beforehand there was just" deemed relevant" so it wasn't clear deemed relevant by whom. I don't think you disagree with that addition, you can add your modification to the document.

I totally agree with your second point and I added a couple of addition to the document to suggest that the ombudsperson should understand ICANN, its community and its structure.

Thanks

Farzaneh

On 21 December 2016 at 03:20, Klaus Stoll <kdrstoll at gmail.com<mailto:kdrstoll at gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear All

Looks like we are making progress on this one. Below 2 short comments.

1.      Review Work Method and Criteria

The work methods are expected to include the following:

·  One-on-one interviews with individuals who are deemed relevant by ombudsman sub group and SO/ACs to the examination. Why are we limiting the interviews to those deemed relevant by Ombudsman sub group and SO/AC? The Assessment should be able to interview everybody it thinks necessary AND all those deemed relevant by sub group and SO/AC.

·  Consultation with the Community The relationship to the community is crucial, and this consultation should be better and more clearly defined. As it stands it says nothing and all.

I think we can not stress enough the need of understanding and working with the community and examination of the Ombudspersons role and relationship within the whole ICANN community.

Yours

Klaus
On 12/21/2016 5:16 AM, farzaneh badii wrote:
Hi

Added some comments questions and texts to Seb's document.

There are a couple of important things that we should not overlook:

1. The reviewer has to completely understand ICANN structure and process. Basic knoweldge is fine but the reviewer has to attend a couple of community meetings and see how things work. The reviewer (as someone suggested in the doc) should also attend ICANN meeting in Copenhagen.

2. one and a half month for the review is simply not enough as Seb also pointed out. I believe it should be extended.

Thanks

On 20 December 2016 at 14:01, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org<mailto:lars.hoffmann at icann.org>> wrote:
Thank you for the very timely turnaround, Sébastien.

All,
If I may, I would like to encourage those who are using MS Word to add their comments to the file Sébastien just sent (attached to this email). It will make the review easier (and quicker) and assure that you will not submit comments that are identical to those of your colleagues.

Many thanks and best wishes,
Lars

From: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien at bachollet.com<mailto:sebastien at bachollet.com>>
Date: Tuesday 20 December 2016 at 11:43
To: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org<mailto:lars.hoffmann at icann.org>>
Cc: "ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>" <ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Ws2-ombudsman] Ombudsman Assessment: RFP Overview

Hello Lars,
Thanks for the draft.
Please find attached with my comments, questions and proposals.
Ready to answer any question.
All the best
SeB

Sébastien Bachollet
+33 6 07 66 89 33<tel:+33%206%2007%2066%2089%2033>
Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr[sebastien.bachollet.fr]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__sebastien.bachollet.fr&d=DgMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=J4rVei4WZIn6-raGBj5dwYkl2jzyfta0KTxH92lGiro&m=k-gs9i_UX-77NEgRsNGq2pIpi0IjfnrH8dvPYcWuQLw&s=2_jCo89V2UtZmbhOrOdI-RpA-JktgJv5Dt1gliRZGGc&e=>/
Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien at bachollet.com<mailto:sebastien at bachollet.com>>

De : <ws2-ombudsman-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ws2-ombudsman-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org<mailto:lars.hoffmann at icann.org>>
Date : lundi 19 décembre 2016 à 23:49
À : "ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>" <ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>>
Objet : [Ws2-ombudsman] Ombudsman Assessment: RFP Overview

Dear Ombudsman Subgroup,

Many thanks again for making time on yesterday’s call for our RFP presentation. While I promised the document by Wednesday, I am pleased to let you know that we have already a draft ready for your consideration (attached to this email). Please note that in the Draft all dates are placeholders- hence the highlights.

We would very much appreciate if you could submit your comments by Friday 23 December 16:00 UTC (local times[timeanddate.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.timeanddate.com_worldclock_fixedtime.html-3Fmsg-3DSubmit-2BComments-2Bto-2BOmbudsman-2BAssessment-2BRFP-26iso-3D20161223T16-26p1-3D-253A&d=DgMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=J4rVei4WZIn6-raGBj5dwYkl2jzyfta0KTxH92lGiro&m=k-gs9i_UX-77NEgRsNGq2pIpi0IjfnrH8dvPYcWuQLw&s=MSm9wS0c8sayrssqvhjAS5QpThdJQnUZ2kCgwHbhbKg&e=>). The deadline is important so that we can get the RFP posted in the first week of January.

While it is up to the Subgroup to determine how to provide comments and feedback, from our experience on-list commenting is often the most efficient way. Depending on how that progresses, you may then decide to hold a call later in the week if need be. The MSSI Team (Larisa, Charla, Lars) would of course be happy to attend such a call- if you think we could be of assistance.

With regards to advertising the RFP once it goes online, we would be very grateful, as we mentioned before, for any suggestions about organizations/associations that we could leverage to publicize the call.

If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to us at any time.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Lars

PS:

_______________________________________________ Ws2-ombudsman mailing list Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman

_______________________________________________
Ws2-ombudsman mailing list
Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman

--
Farzaneh

_______________________________________________

Ws2-ombudsman mailing list

Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman

_______________________________________________
Ws2-ombudsman mailing list
Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org<mailto:Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-ombudsman/attachments/20161221/35a7362a/attachment-0001.html>