[CCWG-ACCT] about the CCWG 30-day comment period

[Kieren McCarthy]

So since this is about accountability, it strikes me that the two ICANN staff who agreed to a shorter public comment period should be named.




I also think one of them should always be the Manager of Public Participation since that is their job.




This is pretty obvious and useful accountability. 







Kieren



-
[sent through phone]

On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na> wrote:

> So,
> now ICANN staff decides what comment period is acceptable.
> Outrageously unacceptable and objected to.
> I am still waiting for the response to my request to be provided with the notes or emails where this was discussed and approved by the CCWG. 
> rl
> -- 
> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
>> On May 5, 2015, at 21:41, Adam Peake <adam.peake at icann.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Note on behalf of Thomas, Leon and Mathieu about the CCWG proposal 30-day
>> public comment period.
>> 
>> Hi everyone,
>> 
>> We have seen comments about the 30-day public comment period.  You will
>> remember this has been our intention since we discussed planning in
>> Istanbul, and we concluded this discussion on the CCWG call of 30 April.
>> The outcome was to propose the first public comment should be for 30 days,
>> which would allow time for us to prepare a response for the ICANN meeting
>> in  Buenos Aires.  It is particularly important that we are able to
>> respond to the dependencies identified by the CWG-Stewardship.
>> 
>> Recognizing that the shorter public comment is not ideal for a subject of
>> such importance to the community, we also took into account the fact that
>> we will to hold a second public comment period some weeks after ICANN53
>> when we will seek input on any outstanding issues and provide details and
>> explanation prompted by discussions with the community from the first
>> public comment and during ICANN53.
>> 
>> The public comment announcement includes the remark "Because this (first)
>> Public Comment period is less than the required 40-day minimum, it has
>> been approved by two ICANN Global Leaders."  The term Global Leaders is a
>> reference to senior members of the ICANN staff and the condition was
>> created to ensure that a check existed so that a single ICANN department
>> would not depart from the standard default time period without broader
>> senior staff input.  The public comment guidelines and procedures are
>> available on the public wiki
>> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=48344695
>> 
>> Warm regards,
>> 
>> Thomas, Leon and Mathieu
>> CCWG co-chairs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150505/285dd18f/attachment.html>