[council] Fwd: Note on Work Track 5

Mon Aug 7 23:29:29 UTC 2017

Hi Phil,

if I understand correctly the work track outcome will go to the whole
working group anyway. We are not following the CCWG framework here with
voting representatives from each SO/AC etc. The working group is only
asking ccNSO and GAC to nominate a co-leaders but that doesn't change the
open membership of the group or how it will use consensus. Since ccNSO and
GAC are not chartering organizations here, I don't see any change in the
decision-making process and the GNSO retain the control, if it is right to
say that, of the whole process.

I understand there are concerns about CCWG be seen as the silver bullet for
all issues but I believe we are crystal clear that gTLD policies are the
remit of solely GNSO (like in our responses to GAC communique). Getting
other stakeholders input and participation is consistent with the GNSO PDP
manual.

do you have some example of risk in mind? will a more explicit outline of
the decision making, aligned with GNSO OP, within the WT5 and in relation
to the WG alleviate your concerns? I think we can also request the council
liaison to the WG to follow the WT5 more closely.

Best,

Rafik

2017-08-08 7:28 GMT+09:00 Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>:

> My primary concern relates to whether the decision making process to be
> used by the sub team would be permissible for the full WG and is consistent
> with relevant GNSO rules and guidelines. If it makes such decisions in the
> manner of a CCWG, and they are then subject to subsequent reversal or
> substantial modification using a different decisional approach, that could
> exacerbate rather than ameliorate the debate.
>
>
>
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> Virtualaw LLC
> 1155 F Street, NW
> Suite 1050
> Washington, DC 20004
> 202-559-8597/Direct
> 202-559-8750/Fax
> 202-255-6172/Cell
>
> Twitter: @VLawDC
>
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Aug 7, 2017, at 4:00 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> Jeff's email below deals with some of the questions raised here on the
> list about SubPro WT5. James, Donna and I can update further after we talk
> with the SubPro leadership tomorrow.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Heather
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
> Date: Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:49 AM
> Subject: Note on Work Track 5
> To: "James Bladel (jbladel at godaddy.com)" <jbladel at godaddy.com>, Heather
> Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, "Austin, Donna" <
> Donna.Austin at team.neustar>
> Cc: avri doria <avri at apc.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>, Emily
> Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org>,
> Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> It seems that there have been a number of questions on the operation and
> establishment of Work Track 5 on the GNSO Council Mailing list.  I am not
> able to post on that list, but ask that this be forwarded.  I have not run
> this response by Avri, but I would hope she agrees.
>
>
>
> According to the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, found at
> https://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/gnso-working-group-gu
> idelines-final-10dec10-en.pdf, Section 2.3 states:
>
>
>
> *“2.3. Use of Sub-Teams *
>
>
>
> *The WG may decide to employ sub-teams as an efficient means of delegating
> topics or assignments to be completed. Sub-team members need to have a
> clear understanding of issues they work on as well as the results to be
> achieved. The members of sub-teams report their results to whole working
> group for review and approval. The WG should indicate whether or not it
> would like to have meetings of the sub-team recorded and/or transcribed. *
>
>
>
> *Any member of the WG may serve on any sub-team; however, depending upon
> the specific tasks to be accomplished, the Chair should ensure that the
> sub-team is properly balanced with the appropriate skills and resources to
> ensure successful completion. It is recommended that the sub-team appoints
> a co-ordinator who heads up the sub-team and is responsible for providing
> regular progress updates to the Working Group.*
>
>
>
> *There is no need for formal confirmation by the CO or WG of such a
> co-ordinator. *
>
>
>
> *The lifespan of a sub-team should not extend beyond that of the Working
> Group. Decisions made by sub-teams should always be shared with the larger
> working group and a call for consensus must be made by the entire WG.  “*
>
>
>
> This is what Avri and I are doing.  We are setting up a “Sub Team” which
> we are calling a “Work Track.”  Other than the last sentence of ensuring
> that all decisions go to the larger working group, there are no other
> restrictions on the operation of a Sub Team. Therefore, we believe that the
> choice of leadership, how meetings are conducted, the name of the group,
> membership, etc. is at our (the co-chair’s) discretion.
>
>
>
> Yes, all of the recommendations from this Work Track will of course go to
> the full Working Group, just as they will for all of the other Work Tracks.
>
>
>
> On the question of whether this will set a precedent on how Sub Teams will
> be used in the future, I will leave that to the folks who look back at this
> time period in 15 years or so.  But if it works and strengthens the
> multi-stakeholder process, while still having it operate under the rubric
> of the GNSO, would that not be a positive precedent?
>
>
>
> I appreciate the Council interest in this and encourage you all to bring
> that enthusiasm to Work Track 5.
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you have any other questions.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Jeffrey J. Neuman*
>
> *Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA* | *Com Laude USA*
>
> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
>
> Mclean, VA 22102, United States
>
> E: *jeff.neuman at valideus.com <jeff.neuman at valideus.com>* or *jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
> <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>*
>
> T: +1.703.635.7514 <(703)%20635-7514>
>
> M: +1.202.549.5079 <(202)%20549-5079>
>
> @Jintlaw
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20170808/fd736308/attachment.html>