[CCWG-ACCT] Edits due in 3h: V10 DRAFT for your review by 2 May at 01:00 UTC
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Sat May 2 15:28:08 UTC 2015
Hi,
I too agree that the report should take a multistakeholder view that
treats all ICANN stakeholders equally.
I do not think that it is necessary that that all stakeholders decide to
do things in the same manner, but that the various options should be
open to all stakeholders on an overall equal footing. I do not believe
that all stakeholders have the same roles and responsibilities in each
phase of every operation. But in the overall process there needs to be
a balanced and equal footing. This is a goal in my view in all Internet
Governance (IG) mechanisms. ICANN is an organization that is closer to
doing this in a open and equal footing manner than most organizations
in IG. I think that it is is important in this Accountabilty work to be
clear about that continuing goal.
I do not, however, wish to accidentally fall into the pattern where
there is parity between 2 stakeholder grouping: private and public.
Rather we need the full multistakeholder mix. I think we should mention
neither public nor private and just mention the diversity of stakeholder
groups involved in ICANN. The word multistakeholder should be sufficient.
avri
On 02-May-15 10:06, Olga Cavalli wrote:
> Dear all,
> thanks for the draft.
> I support Kavouss comments and suggested edits.
> Regards
> Olga
>
> 2015-05-02 4:35 GMT-03:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
> <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>:
>
> IMPORTANT AND URGENT
>
> Dear co-chairs,
>
> Thank you very much for your enormous and tireless efforts to put
> this doc. for final comments
>
> I have had many comments but I could not finish the edits till now.
>
> I therefore do not wish to delay the work.
>
> However, I have one VERY IMPORTANT edit that I raised it in my
> last e-mail.
>
> That edit is relating to a reference to ICANN or Internet Process
> as being «private led multistakeholder” organization or process.
>
> This is a mistake. a big mistake. There is no such preference to
> one category of stakeholder over other categories of stakeholder
> (private or public) .
>
> I raised this matter at one of our call and asked for deletion of
> that term.
>
> All stakeholder, irrespective being private, public, and etc.
> *SHALL * be treated equally. This issue was raised at various
> occasions by NTIA indicating / emphasizing that no single category
> of the stakeholder should benefit from preference over other
> categories of stakeholders .This term was used at very early stage
> of the introduction of the ICANN into the business. Over the time
> when we discussed that the process should be inclusive,
> democratic, then it was agreed by everybody that no category of
> the stakeholder should have any preference, what so ever, or
> should have a preferred treatment over other categories of the
> stakeholders.
>
> In view of the above, I urge you to kindly correct such a big
> mistake which if it is not corrected would put us in a very
> delicate situation that we did not respect impartiality and
> neutrality in treating various categories of the stakeholders.
>
> There are 4 or 5 times that such a reference to »private led
> multistakeholder are referred to in the doc.
>
> Pls kindly make a simple «find" check and delete all that. Term
> in other part of doc. whenever, so as reference is maded to
> multistakeholder there is no such an incorrect and discriminative
> preference.
>
> Regards
>
> Kavouss
>
>
> 2015-05-02 9:01 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh
> <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>:
>
> Dear All,
> I have not finish edits .I am on page 50. However, in view of
> time time constrain, I have an important edit that is attached.
> The same edit should be carried forward elsewhere throughout
> the entire document . please then search for " private sector
> led " and DELETE THAT . I mentioned in one of the call .See
> Attached doc.
> Regards
>
>
> 2015-05-02 3:34 GMT+02:00 Samantha Eisner
> <Samantha.Eisner at icann.org <mailto:Samantha.Eisner at icann.org>>:
>
> Thanks Grace.
>
> Dear CCWG,
> Attached please find some proposed edits for consideration.
>
> Best,
>
> Sam
>
> From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org
> <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2015 at 3:52 PM
> To: Accountability Cross Community
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Edits due in 3h: V10 DRAFT for your
> review by 2 May at 01:00 UTC
>
> Hi all,
> Just a reminder than edits, comments are due in
> approximately 3h. Thank you to those who sent edits
> earlier today. If you must send late edits, please send a
> note to the Chairs_with staff in copy_ to give us notice
> that your comments will be delayed. Best to stick to the
> deadline, but we know everyone is working hard to get this
> draft report ready, and we’d rather get your comments than
> not at all.
> Have a good weekend,
> Grace
>
> From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org
> <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2015 at 11:19 AM
> To: Accountability Cross Community
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: V10 DRAFT for your review by 2 May at 01:00 UTC
>
> Dear all,
>
> We sent the V10 draft report earlier today (in UTC) but
> have been notified that, in some cases, the files are too
> large to download from the email attachments. As a
> reminder, the draft (redline and clean versions) are
> posted on the
> Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Draft+Report.
>
> Looking forward to receiving your comments and edits,
> Grace
>
> From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org
> <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
> Date: Thursday, April 30, 2015 at 9:22 PM
> To: Accountability Cross Community
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: V10 DRAFT for your review by 2 May at 01:00 UTC
>
> Dear all,
>
> Here attached is the CCWG-Accountability Draft Report V10.
> I have attached a redline and a clean version (in Word and
> PDF).
>
> Version 10 incorporates the following:
>
> * Changes from the CCWG-Accountability call on Thursday
> 30 April at 05:00 UTC
> * Edits from legal counsel (Sidley and Adler)
> * Approval from the CWG-Stewardship Chairs/Client
> Committee regarding incorporation of CWG-Stewardship
> recommendations
> * Edits from Chairs and Rapporteurs
>
> Please send your edits, comments, etc to the mailing list
> by*Saturday 2 May 01:00 UTC* (24h from now). Staff will
> incorporate the edits over the weekend so as to release a
> final version for Public Comment on Monday, 4 May. /If
> possible, edits are appreciate in track changes in the
> _clean_ version so that they are _clearly marked and
> visible_. /There will be professional formatting and
> copyediting done before publication, so we suggest that
> your time my be best spent by focusing on the
> substance-related edits.
>
> Also, please remember to submit your feedback regarding
> the XPlane graphics by Saturday as well. Adam will send a
> reminder re: XPlane.
>
> Almost there!
> — Grace
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150502/8c81eeda/attachment.html>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list