[atrt2] Independent Expert
Alan Greenberg
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Sat Jun 8 01:57:44 UTC 2013
My assessments and comments are attached.
Alan
At 05/06/2013 06:06 PM, Brian Cute wrote:
>Review Team,
>
>To complete the process of determining whether ATRT2 should engage
>an Independent Expert, we will proceed with a two-step process:
>
> Step One: Final discussion of proposed issues
> for Independent Expert
>
>On the last full ATRT2 Review Team call, Members who put forward
>potential issues for Independent Expert work were afforded a minimal
>amount of time to articulate why their proposed issue were deserving
>of theengagement of an Independent Expert. Nor was there an
>opportunity for other Review Team members to express their views on
>the candidate issues.
>
>For the next 72 hours (until 10:00p.m. UTC , Saturday), all Review
>Team members are asked to put their views forward, by email on the
>ATRT2 email list, concerning the proposed issues and whether ATRT2
>should engage an Independent Expert. Members who offered an issue
>for consideration are invited to provide justification for their
>issue(s). Other Review Team members are invited to support a
>proposed issue or provide arguments as to why a proposed issue does
>not merit the work of an Independent Expert. To the extent possible,
>we do not want this process to become a "beauty contest" so please
>submit comments that are framed to address only the individual
>merits of a proposed issue and not a comparison of one proposal to
>another. The 6 issues under consideration are as follows:
>
>1. Case Studies of PDPs and Processes with regard to ATRT1 advice (Avri)
>2. Whistle-blower program - Effectiveness and adherence to standards (Avri)
>3. ICANN Finances (Lise)
>4. Case study re: effectiveness of PDP process (Alan)
>5. Public Interest - ecosystem value chain (Carlos)
>6. Metrics (Brian)
>
>(Note that the ATRT2 government representatives are addressing
>Jorgen's proposed issue of "Outreach" to governments separately and
>for that reason has been removed from the list of potential
>Independent Expert issues.)
>
>Falling under Issue #1 above, a number of specific case studies have
>been recommended (byAvri and identified from review of Public
>Comments received to date). When the Doodle poll is circulated,
>Review Team members who support Issue #1 above will also be asked to
>identify specific case studies to be undertaken by an Independent
>Expert from the following list:
>
>
>1. New gTLD program
>
>2. Applicant Support program
>
>3. ICANN Travel policy
>
>4. IDN ccTLD PDP
>
>5. ASO Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation
>Mechanisms by the IAN
>
>6. Vertical Integration
>
>7. Public Interest Commitments
>
>8. Trademark Clearing House
>
>9. Board - GAC interaction concerning GAC Advise
>
>10. External review of the Board
>
>11. ICANN's relationship with the registrars
>
>12. Independent assessment of the public comments to avoid
>self-dealing and post hoc rationalization
>
>13. Staff interaction and support of business and intellectual
>property interests
>
>14. Gaps in stakeholders' presence in ICANN
>
>15. Cross Community efforts, modalities and success
>
>While all of the issues and potential case studies below may be
>suitable for review by ATRT2, Members are being asked to identify
>whether a given issue requires the assistance of anIndependent
>Expert. When putting forward your views on the proposed issues,
>please consider and address the following factors:
>
>- whether the work of an Independent Expert on the
>issue will provide critical benefit to ATRT2 and its recommendations
>to the ICANN Board;
>
>
>- could the issue be effectively addressed with
>existing ATRT2 resources;
>
>- how significant do you expect this issue to be in
>terms of impact on ICANN's accountability and transparency;
>- how many issues could/should an Independent Expert
>be asked to undertake (time and money are natural constraints);
>- is the issue one that would need to factor into
>the ATRT2 recommendations or one that would be a stand-alone
>analysis that, in parallel, is complementary to the ATRT2's work;
>
>- is this issue related to specific mandate of
>paragraph 9.1 of the Affirmation of Commitments;
>
>
>Attached for your review are the "1 pager" documents that were
>submitted as proposed issues. Also attached is a spreadsheet that
>you can use to support or oppose a given issue. Use of the
>spreadsheet is at your discretion. Comments in any format are welcome.
>
>
>
>Step 2: Doodle Poll
>
>When the 72 hour period closes, ICANN Staff will circulate a Doodle
>poll for Review Team members to vote on the issue (or issues) that
>he or she believes requires the work of an Independent Expert.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Brian, Avri, Lise and Alan
>
>
>Content-Type: application/x-msword; name="Final Discussion of Proposed Issues"
> for Idependent Expert - 1pagers.docx"
>Content-Description: Final Discussion of Proposed Issues for Idependent
> Expert - 1pagers.docx
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Final Discussion of Proposed"
> Issues for Idependent Expert - 1pagers.docx"; size=143323;
> creation-date="Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:06:15 GMT";
> modification-date="Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:06:15 GMT"
>
>_______________________________________________
>atrt2 mailing list
>atrt2 at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Independent Expert - spreadsheet-AG.xlsx
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 15885 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20130607/99a9fe89/IndependentExpert-spreadsheet-AG.xlsx>
More information about the atrt2
mailing list