[CCWG-ACCT] Notes, recordings, transcript for CCWG ACCT Plenary Meeting #15 | 29 March 2017

Fri Mar 31 20:20:13 UTC 2017

Hello all,

The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Meeting #15 – 29 March 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/0LbRAw
 A copy of the action items and notes may be found below.

Thank you.

With kind regards,
Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant
Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI)
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
[cid:image001.png at 01D2AA32.4AC70790]
Action items:

·         Staff to write to plenary list to inquire who is preparing to respond, or knows of people/groups who will, to the Good Faith and Transparency Public Consultations.

·         Staff to publish SOAC Accountability Draft Recommendation for public consultation summarizing the issues around removing Mutual from MAR in the Announcement.

·         Diversity sub-group to decide how to proceed with the survey.

·         Greg Shatan to prepare an update for the next plenary on the Jurisdiction sub-group process, current work approach and progress.

Notes: (including relevant portions of chat)
26  Participants at start of call
Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior
Thomas Rickert - Now a member of NIC AT advisory Board. Will update SOI.
Review of Agenda
Kavouss Arateh - Need to reconsider the work of the Jurisdiction group progress and methods at the level of the plenary.
Mathieu Weill - propose initial discussion in AOB and prepare a full intervention for the next plenary. Any objections? (none)
Avri Doria: One value in Mathieu’s  approach is that it allows all the protagonists to show up for the conversation.
Avri Doria: but we should have the conversation and not avoid having the discussion
Administration
Patrick Dodson - We will be turning on captioning for all WS2 calls in the short term as a follow on to the Captioning trial earlier this year. Will consider if we still need the transcription service later on.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): captioning will be a great asset.
FIONA ASONGA: + Cheryl, Patrick
Leon Sanchez: This is a "yes we can" moment :-)
avri doria: captioning is great.  will help a lot when attending overlapping meetings.
Sebastien Bachollet - any link of captioning with the interpretation request from Diversity? Also on public comment type things the Ombuds team is working with the evaluator who was been interviewing people and will also publish a questionnaire at then end of the week.
Patrick Dodson: Sebastien, two different topics, and we are still circulating the official request for interpretation internally.
Patrick Dodson: Coordinating with language services and PCST.
Mathieu Weill - Action Item - Staff to ask the plenary list if members know of people preparing input for the public comments.
Decision – Captioning will be provided for all WS2 meeting including sub-groups.
Action Item – Staff to write to plenary list to inquire who is preparing to respond, or knows of people who will,  to the Good Faith and Transparency Public Consultations.
Legal Committee Update
Leon Sachez - Pending is the Jurisdiction questions. Have asked for an update from ICANN legal this week but have yet to receeive a reply.
Updates/Presentation from sub-groups
SO/AC Accountability - Second Reading
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - Thanks to all for the contributions.
Steve DelBianco - (presentation of red-line version from the first reading). https://community.icann.org/x/lBWOAw
Christopher Wilkinson - Prefer we use Gender Balance - Also want to know what happened to MART.
Steve DelBianco - CW - for Diversity we are waiting for the Diversity sub-group to complete their work. as to the MART this is the next part of the topic.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): so it acts as a placeholder for any outcomes of the Diversity WT in our dimensions reference
Greg Shatan: We should clarify that SO/AC reviews should also take these best practices into account.
Jordan Carter: Steve, I think the way that you've included this and taken the feedback from the plenary on board makes sense. it's probably about as far as can be gone at this point.
Kavuss Arasteh - In the Outreach - the membership ranking - what is this? What about REQUIRED at the end?
Steve DelBianco - there is no ranking of memberships. We also have not used REQUIRED.
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Kavouss, just did a double check in the doc on "require". I confirm Steve's statement.
Steve DelBianco: we can just drop "ranks" from that sentence
Farzaneh Badii: I agree with dropping ranks on page 7
Steve DelBianco: on pages 7-8 we recommend that ICANN place these Best Practices in the Policies & Procedures for Reviews
Julie Hammer - re MART - remember people wanting to add to this recommendation. I was unware that we were considering bringing back MART which I do not agree with - I think the original recommendation from the group was not objected by that many people.
Steve DelBianco - Our original recommendation was that there was no requirement to implement, The new text has it as an option.
Izumi Okutani (ASO): I have the same impression as Julie while I was not physically attending the meeting and was attending remotely
CW: Julie +1. I am supporting exchange of best practice and mutual transparency. However, mutual accountability could lead to conflicts of interest.
Greg Shatan - JH makes a good point - mutual accountability seems to include more that what we are looking at which is just a discussion of areas of mutual accountability. Would suggest not calling a MART but rather a round table on mutual accountability.
Julie Hammer (SSAC): +1 Greg.  Absolutely agree.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - @GS - we agree as rapporteurs were going to consider changing the nomenclature.
Julie Hammer (SSAC): Yes, agree to remove the term MART altogether.
Jordan Carter - This is just about putting accountability on the agenda - we can change the name.
Sebastien Bachollet - really feel accountability must be mutual. We need this.
CW: @ Julie. Now I get it! There is NO WAY SSAC is 'accountbaile' to the other SOAC. I want to see an independent SSAC.
avri doria: in fact the notion of mutual accountabilty seems almost a fundamental part of the multistakeholder enterprise.
Jordan Carter: if icann's culture would turn a "mutual" approach into unpleasant and unconstructive point scoring, we have to change the culture - starting with a broad based conversation might start that.
Kavouss Arasteh - Support SB.
Steve DelBianco: True, CW.   We can remove "mutual" so that the conversation / roundtable is about sharing experiences with accountability TO THEIR DESIGNATED COMMUNITIES
Jordan Carter: CW: but other SOs and ACs can and should be able to quiz SSAC on decisions it makes within ICANN - and vice versa too.
Julie Hammer (SSAC): @CW SSAC should be accountable to the Board and the Community for the quality of its advice.
Jordan Carter: Doesn't in the slightest compromise its independence.
Julie Hammer (SSAC): @Jordan Yes, agree.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - we will take this back to the group for a look at the nomenclature.
Julie Hammer (SSAC): @Jordan Yes, agree.
Steve DelBianco: and we are dropping the word Ranks.
avri doria: is it just an issue of nomenclature?
Jordan Carter: Avri: my sense is that people don't want anyone questioning their decisions
avri doria: i dis not hear a 'just nomenclature' discussion
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): that's part of it Avri
Jordan Carter: I heard that that echoes in ICANN's current culture in a threatening way
avri doria: Jordan, that may be the case.  we would all prefer to be totally autonomous without any accountabilty.
Wolfgang: Part of the Board Accountability discussion was the option to spill the board or to remove individual board directors. My question is did you discuss procedures how to remove individual council or committee members?
avri doria: accountabilty to the whole.
avri doria: Wolfgang< i do not beleive removing council members of other reps was discussed.
Jordan Carter: I think this sub-group decided not to apply those powers to SO and AC or subgroups
Thomas Rickert - Looking to remove MUTUAL and RANKING. With those two changes in mind any objections to accepting this as a second reading?
Sebastien Bachollet - Do not agree.
avri doria: i will support sebatien on this
Thomas Rickert - given there are no other objections except AD and KA. As such we will consider this accepted for a second reading. Would invite those people to put in a comment in the public comment on this document.
Sebastien Bachollet - do not agree and should not go to public comment.
Thomas Rickert - SB this is not our process where only a minority object blocks publication. This has followed our process and been accepted per that process.
Steve DelBianco - Am confident the sub-group would accept dropping MUTUAL. So there is no purpose in the SB request as the sub-group was never comfortable recommending the MART.
Avri Doria - will join SB that we need mutual accountability. Do not agree we take out MUTUAL (procedural POV). If we want to edit it it needs to go back to the group.
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Thomas, I think there has been ample discussion in the subgroup as well as in the plenary at this point.
Julie Hammer (SSAC): Publishing this document and seeking the reactions of the SO/AC Chartering Organisations on this issue would be helpful.
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Support your proposed way forward.
John Laprise: +1 Avri & Sebastien
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - We could publish as is.
Izumi Okutani (ASO): I agree with the suggested way forward by Cheryl and Thomas. Avri's comment on bringining to attention makes sense
Thomas Rickert - Agree with AD - so recommend we make clear in the public consultation about the discussion around Mutual. Any objections? (1 SB). Accepted as a second reading. So not full consensus but consensus.
Sebastien Bachollet - I did put up a red cross and oppose strongly.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - disagree with SDB on interpretation.
Thomas Rickert - I do not think this document needs to go back to the sub-team as there are only two edits - remove RANK and Mutual. Additionally in the announcement we will clearly mention that there was a debate on having the word Mutual. Do not see a need for revision of the sub-team.
avri doria: I vote against Steve's understanding.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): happy to support your way forward Thomas
Izumi Okutani (ASO): + 1 Cheryl
avri doria: i do not support. but give up. for today.
Greg Shatan: There can be two concepts of mutual accountability: (1) Each SO/AC to each other SO/AC (multiple bilateral accountabiloity) or (2
avri doria: i support the second option as well
Lori Schulman: Agree with Greg and Avir
Diversity questionnaire - second reading -
Fiona Asonga - (Presentation of edited document - sound issues)
Leon Sanchez - (presentation of document) objections to this being a successful second reading? (none).
Julie Hammer (SSAC): This version incorporates all the suggestions and feedback from the Plenary in CPH.
avri doria: there was not agreement on tis in the subgroup as far as i know.  what good is the report before the questionnaire?
Renata Aquino Ribeiro: +1
FIONA ASONGA 2: We did as a subgroup discuss and agree to proceed with the questionnaire first
Renata Aquino Ribeiro: option 1
avri doria: i asume we want the questionnaire answered.
Renata Aquino Ribeiro: publish the questionnaire to get answers
FIONA ASONGA 2: The questionnaire needs to be answered to guide us on the recommendations
Julie Hammer (SSAC): Sorry Bernie, I missed that subtle difference.
FIONA ASONGA 2: I would seek advise on what the minimun period for public comments is as required within ICANN
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: 42 days
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: BUt request to SO/AC take 2 to 3 months
Renata Aquino Ribeiro: how long did the so/ac questionnaire take?
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: See precedent of SO/AC Acct
Renata Aquino Ribeiro: our questionnnaire has 1/3 the size
FIONA ASONGA 2: Ok then that means we will just have to go out with some draft recomendations
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: That was the rationale in Copenhagen
Renata Aquino Ribeiro: sorry Leon didn't get that
FIONA ASONGA 2: The challenge is that the recommendations will not have been though t through in view of the responses
Mathieu Weill - We have accepted the questionnaire at the second reading and would ask the sub-group to consider how to proceed with it taking into account the timelines.
FIONA ASONGA 2: The Action Item for the diversity group is acceptable
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: Thanks Fiona
Next Plenary
AOB
Mathieu Weill - onto AOB.
Kavouss Arasteh - (no audio)
Mathieu Weill - would GS be prepared to give an update on the progress and the workplan at the next plenary? Action Item.
Greg Shatan - agree.
Mathieu Weill - adjourned.
Adjournment

Decisions:
Captioning service will be provided for all WS2 meeting ASAP
SOAC Accountability draft recommendations successfully completed second reading and should be published for public consultation with the following conditions:
Remove RANK and Mutual (in MAR)
Public Consultation Announcement should summarize the issues around removing Mutual from MAR.
Diversity Questionnaire successfully completed second reading. The Diversity sub-group will consider at its next meeting how to proceed with this.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20170331/fcad7cbf/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5171 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20170331/fcad7cbf/image001-0001.png>