[council] Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Fri Feb 21 22:31:39 UTC 2014
Hi,
On 21-Feb-14 23:16, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> by using vague and imprecise language, i hope to add to my mystique. :-)
How could it get much greater?
>
> sorry — you’re right. i really intended both meanings with that word.
> can you and Avri carry that message for me?
It is not for us to carry anymore.
the comments are for the Board.
ATRT2 became history on 1 Jan 2014.
sorry
avri
>
> mikey
>
>
> On Feb 21, 2014, at 11:14 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>> wrote:
>
>> Mikey, in your second paragraph, you use the expression
>> "well-supported". Do you mean supported as in "rah, rah, we want it",
>> or "well-funded". If the latter, you should be more explicit.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> At 21/02/2014 10:33 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>>> hi again — this is a slightly newer new version. i decided to break
>>> up the paragraph a little bit, that’s all. here’s the way i did it
>>>
>>> The ATRT2 report documents how a very small group of dedicated
>>> volunteers carry an extraordinary proportion of the working-group
>>> load and correctly identifies this as a major concern. We note that
>>> simply increasing the pool of people aware of and in some way engaged
>>> with ICANN should not be viewed as the goal. Ultimately what is
>>> needed is a larger and more diverse group of active and effective
>>> volunteer participants in PDP working groups.
>>>
>>> Although outreach is an important part of the effort and crucial for
>>> bringing new volunteers to ICANN, the path to this goal should not
>>> end at simply recruiting a large diverse group of people. Rather,
>>> there needs to be a clear and well-supported progression for
>>> community volunteers to gain the skills, knowledge and experience
>>> needed to broaden the ranks of active PDP participants and leaders.
>>>
>>> We support reversing the current trend of too little focus on the
>>> recruiting, development and support of capable volunteer policymakers
>>> while increasingly following the expedient path of hiring expert
>>> panels, expanding staff and hand-picking “community representatives”
>>> through opaque “selection committees.”
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Mike O'Connor <mike at haven2.com
>>> <mailto:mike at haven2.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for the comments. here’s a new version.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The ATRT2 report documents how a very small group of dedicated
>>>> volunteers carry an extraordinary proportion of the working-group
>>>> load and correctly identifies this as a major concern. We note that
>>>> simply increasing the pool of people aware of and in some way
>>>> engaged with ICANN should not be viewed as the goal. Ultimately
>>>> what is needed is a larger and more diverse group of active and
>>>> effective volunteer participants in PDP working groups. Although
>>>> outreach is an important part of the effort and crucial for bringing
>>>> new volunteers to ICANN, the path to this goal should not end at
>>>> simply recruiting a large diverse group of people. Rather, there
>>>> needs to be a clear and well-supported progression for community
>>>> volunteers to gain the skills, knowledge and experience needed to
>>>> broaden the ranks of active PDP participants and leaders. We
>>>> support reversing the current trend of too little focus on the
>>>> recruiting, development and support of capable volunteer
>>>> policymakers while increasingly following the expedient path of
>>>> hiring expert panels, expanding staff and hand-picking “community
>>>> representatives” through opaque “selection committees.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <ATRT2 - Draft Council Input (14 February 2014) MO2.doc>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 8:54 AM, Thomas Rickert <rickert at anwaelte.de
>>>> <mailto:rickert at anwaelte.de>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 21.02.2014 um 15:48 schrieb "James M. Bladel"
>>>>> <jbladel at godaddy.com <mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com>>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I also support Mikey’s edits, but to Klaus’ point, I’m wondering
>>>>>> if we can insert something emphasizing that new participants be
>>>>>> “volunteers”? We do not want to encourage the trend of hiring
>>>>>> outside experts, proliferating Staff, and hand-picked participants
>>>>>> chosen by an opaque “selection committee.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> J.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Klaus Stoll <kdrstoll at gmail.com <mailto:kdrstoll at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> Date: Friday, February 21, 2014 at 8:02
>>>>>> To: "Reed, Daniel A" <dan-reed at uiowa.edu
>>>>>> <mailto:dan-reed at uiowa.edu>>, Mike O'Connor <mike at haven2.com
>>>>>> <mailto:mike at haven2.com>>, GNSO Council List
>>>>>> <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org> >
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency
>>>>>> Review Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fine with me as long as we don't start breading more "experts".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Klaus
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/21/2014 2:46 PM, Reed, Daniel A wrote:
>>>>>>> I think this is fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:*owner-council at gnso.icann.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>>>>> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike O'Connor
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 21, 2014 7:04 AM
>>>>>>> *To:* council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency
>>>>>>> Review Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i agree Maria. i had a go at adding another paragraph to our
>>>>>>> response to Rec #10.3 and have attached the revised draft. but
>>>>>>> to save you time, here’s the language i inserted
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The ATRT2 report documents how a very small group of dedicated
>>>>>>> volunteers carry an extraordinary proportion of the working-group
>>>>>>> load and correctly identifies this as a major concern. We note
>>>>>>> that simply increasing the pool of people aware of and in some
>>>>>>> way engaged with ICANN should not be viewed as the goal.
>>>>>>> Ultimately what is needed is a larger and more diverse group of
>>>>>>> active and effective participants in PDP working groups.
>>>>>>> Although outreach is an important part of the effort and crucial
>>>>>>> for bringing newcomers to ICANN, the path to this goal should not
>>>>>>> end at simply recruiting a large diverse group of people.
>>>>>>> Rather, there needs to be a clear and well-supported progression
>>>>>>> for newcomers to gain the skills, knowledge and experience needed
>>>>>>> to broaden the ranks of active PDP participants and leaders.”
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> happy to consider revisions.
>>>>>>> mikey
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 3:56 AM, Maria Farrell
>>>>>>> <maria.farrell at gmail.com <mailto:maria.farrell at gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>>>>> I'm happy to support this, and thank you for drafting it.
>>>>>>> There's one small typo, track changes version attached. It's
>>>>>>> in para 1, page 3.
>>>>>>> I'd have liked if we tackled head-on the issue of the
>>>>>>> narrowness of some PDP WGs' participation, which the ATRT2
>>>>>>> report provided some pretty convincing numbers on. But as I
>>>>>>> haven't gone to the trouble of actually drafting anything on
>>>>>>> it, I can't complain.
>>>>>>> All the best, Maria
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21 February 2014 09:15, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a member of the ATRT2, I do not believe it my job to
>>>>>>> comment on our report.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the GNSO response is fine as far as it goes and I
>>>>>>> am pleased that at least something is being submitted -
>>>>>>> though I must admit I am less than enthused about
>>>>>>> responses that essentially say "we are already doing that".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I might have wished for it to be more supportive of other
>>>>>>> aspects of the report, but the response is what it is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21-Feb-14 09:43, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *_PLEASE RESPOND WITHIN 8 HOURS_*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:*Jonathan Robinson
>>>>>>> [mailto:jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com]
>>>>>>> *Sent:* 20 February 2014 09:38
>>>>>>> *To:* council at gnso.icann.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: Second Accountability and Transparency
>>>>>>> Review Team (ATRT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of public comment on the
>>>>>>> ends approximately
>>>>>>> 36 hours from now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am OK to submit a letter in substantially the same
>>>>>>> for as that
>>>>>>> distributed to you on 14 Feb (see below) and
>>>>>>> re-attached to this letter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BUT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I need your support to do so. Accordingly, even if
>>>>>>> you simply provide
>>>>>>> support without any comment on the content, that will
>>>>>>> be helpful.
>>>>>>> *_PLEASE RESPOND WITHIN 24 HOURS_*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank-you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:*Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info]
>>>>>>> *Sent:* 14 February 2014 17:21
>>>>>>> *To:* council at gnso.icann.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>>>>> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Second Accountability and Transparency
>>>>>>> Review Team (ATRT 2)
>>>>>>> Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>>> *Importance:* High
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are not already, please be aware of the following:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/atrt2-recommendations-09jan14-en.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The opportunity to provide comments _ends one week
>>>>>>> from today 23h59 UTC
>>>>>>> on 21 Feb 2014_.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The ATRT2 interacted with many in the community
>>>>>>> during the course of its
>>>>>>> work, including directly with the GNSO Council which
>>>>>>> was certainly
>>>>>>> appreciated. We now have an opportunity to comment
>>>>>>> on the final report.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we do intend to comment, my opinion is that we
>>>>>>> should at least submit
>>>>>>> an indication of intent, if not the primary comment,
>>>>>>> in the initial
>>>>>>> comment period and not wait for the reply period.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Given the tight time frame, I have taken the unusual
>>>>>>> step of drafting a
>>>>>>> council response for your consideration. The ATRT2
>>>>>>> deals with some
>>>>>>> critical areas of GNSO work and function and so it
>>>>>>> seems to me that we
>>>>>>> should respond to the call for comments, specifically
>>>>>>> in so far as the
>>>>>>> report deals with GNSO Policy and directly related areas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am aware that some of you were on the ATRT2 and
>>>>>>> others actively worked
>>>>>>> on Council interaction with the ATRT2. Therefore,
>>>>>>> you may well have
>>>>>>> strong views on the subject matter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I look forward to your input and any suggestions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <ATRT2 - Draft Council Input (14 February 2014).doc>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com
>>>>>>> <http://www.haven2.com/>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter,
>>>>>>> Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com
>>>> <http://www.haven2.com/>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter,
>>>> Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
>>>
>>>
>>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com
>>> <http://www.haven2.com/>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter,
>>> Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
>>>
>
>
> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com
> <http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook,
> LinkedIn, etc.)
>
More information about the council
mailing list