[CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

Drazek, Keith kdrazek at verisign.com
Tue Jan 19 12:57:41 UTC 2016


Agree that a rationale must be provided, every time.

Regards,
Keith

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Shears
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2016 3:05 PM
To: Robin Gross; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

+ 1
On 18/01/2016 20:00, Robin Gross wrote:
I agree that we need to remove the "every effort" language, which is indeed a loophole..  A rationale should be provided by the AC.  Period.  Next issue.

Thanks,
Robin

On Jan 18, 2016, at 10:31 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:

Mathieu,
That recommendation ("every effort") is inadequate and frankly, bizarre.  Under what circumstances could an AC make "every effort" and still fail to provide a rationale?  If an AC makes "every effort" to develop a rationale and still fails, what does that tell us about the recommendation?  That no rational support can be found for it?  That the AC can agree on the result but not the rationale?  That the AC would rather not state the rationale?

For those who say that the GAC already offers rationales for their recommendations -- if those rationales were considered satisfactory, this issue would not have been raised in the first place.  If necessary, we can go back to specific items of advice, and the rationales or lack thereof; but I don't know that we have the time to engage in such an exercise.  For one, I recall that in the .africa IRP concerns were raised about the lack of a sufficiently-stated rationale.  If the GAC is looking for greater parity with GNSO PDP policy recommendations, the documentation accompanying those recommendations should serve as a guide.

It is heartening to hear that the GAC is already working on improving their communication the rationales for their advice.  As such, we all seem to be moving in the same direction.

With that in mind, there should be no real issue with removing the squishy "every effort" loophole and stating an unqualified requirement for a rationale for all AC advice.

Greg

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org>> wrote:
Mathieu -  Regarding formal advice from any Advisory Committee (AC), many commenters reiterated that a rationale should be a requirement for advice to be considered by the board.   (BC, NPOC, Google, USCIB, RySG, Valideus, the US Chamber, RrSG, NCUC, I2C, Intel, IPC)

It's not enough to require that each AC "will make every effort".




From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>
Date: Monday, January 18, 2016 at 3:10 AM
To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>, Mike Chartier <mike.s.chartier at intel.com<mailto:mike.s.chartier at intel.com>>
Cc: "accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>" <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

Mike,

Good catch indeed. Precisely the point of our first reading exercise.

So we will add this to recommendation 11 agenda item tomorrow.

I will note that the current annex includes a related recommendation :
·         Insert a mention for all ACs: "The AC will make every effort to ensure that the advice provided is clear and supported by a rationale."
Best,
Mathieu

De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Greg Shatan
Envoyé : lundi 18 janvier 2016 05:30
À : Chartier, Mike S
Cc : accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

Mike,

Good point and good catch.  This should not have been overlooked.

Greg

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Chartier, Mike S <mike.s.chartier at intel.com<mailto:mike.s.chartier at intel.com>> wrote:
I think this is another illustration of how we need to be careful in documenting the process for handling comments (other than the Boards). For Recommendation 11 several commenters offered the proposal to add a requirement for GAC advice to be accompanied by a rationale. Given the general acceptance of proposals for rationales in other areas, I would have thought it would have at least been given a note in the prep document.
Look forward to discussing on Tues.


From: <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Alice Jansen
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 12:01 PM
To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

Sent on behalf of CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs

In preparation for your Recommendation 11 - GAC Advice (first reading) discussion scheduled for your call #78 - Tuesday, 19 January 2016 (12:00 - 15:00 UTC) - please find attached the material to review.
Please use this email thread to circulate any comments you may have in advance of the call.

Thank you

Mathieu, Thomas, León

_______________________________________________
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<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community



--



Matthew Shears

Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights

Center for Democracy & Technology

mshears at cdt.org<mailto:mshears at cdt.org>

+ 44 771 247 2987
[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/logo-avast-v1.png]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>

This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160119/640d5809/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list