[CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT

Fri Dec 19 18:44:37 UTC 2014

Hello Greg,

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Seun:
>
> I'm not sure I understand the distinction you are drawing between "all
> inclusive" and "representative."  Can you elaborate, please?
>

I will try to to explain what i mean by the statement below:

The activities of the MRT needs to be completely non-representational as
> much as possible.
>

This simply means that although the members of the team are drawn from the
relevant SO/ACs (i.e GNSO/ccNSO/GAC/ALAC) but the team's decision making
process should be open to anybody globally (which includes the communities
of members of the team) so thats what i mean by all-inclusive.

That will help me understand why you are saying that its work should be
> "non-representational."  I would have thought that having the Members act
> as representatives of their communities would be a good thing (subject only
> to the caveat that the group as a whole needs to work for the common good
> and not to satisfy a series of special interests).
>

No that would defeat the goal of providing means for communities/individual
outside ICANN to participate.

However in all these, we should note that MRT by design will be a last
resort trigger and will only come in when the normal reconciliation
processes of the SO/AC has proved abortive. For example, if the policy
implementation wg of GNSO follow its processes to addressing its concern
with the IANA operator and it still proved abortive, then the MRT comes in
to develop a community acceptable solution which the ICANN board will be
required to implement.

I hope this clarifies what i meant.

Thanks

>
> Greg
>
>
>
> *Gregory S. Shatan **|* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
>
> *666 Third Avenue **|** New York, NY 10017-5621*
>
> *Direct*  212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
>
> *Fax*  212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
>
> *gsshatan at lawabel.com <gsshatan at lawabel.com>*
>
> *ICANN-related: gregshatanipc at gmail.com <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> *
>
> *www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Greg and other CWG members:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am thinking more and more that the MRT should be almost completely
>>> orthogonal to the GNSO/ccNSO/GAC/ALAC policy making complex. Our mental
>>> model of what it is and who should be on it needs to be completely detached
>>> from the policy making apparatus. We might think of drawing representatives
>>> from the regional network operating groups (NOGs), from the IAB/IETEF/ISOC,
>>> with a leavening of registry operators and civil society and prominent
>>> public officials to ensure a public interest perspective.
>>>
>>
>> Just to mention that i disagree with this view, members of the MRT should
>> be drawn from the SO/ACs which is a known multistakeholder community but
>> the activities of MRT is what needs to be all inclusive and not
>> representative. The activities of the MRT needs to be completely
>> non-representational as much as possible. The charter of MRT should make
>> that clear distinction and on a lighter note, like i mentioned during the
>> rfp3 call, maybe the name MRT is also putting too much weight on
>> representation ;)
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --MM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>> cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 18, 2014 4:22 PM
>>> *To:* Christopher Wilkinson
>>> *Cc:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org
>>>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Christopher,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think a 3 1/2 page chart is excessively complex, and I would
>>> note that the ALAC proposal also has an MRT-like structure, which will face
>>> many of the same issues.  Up to this point, one of the concerns has been
>>> the relative lack of detail about some of the elements of the proposal.  I
>>> think it's reasonable to address those concerns.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you shed some light on the basis and thinking behind your prediction
>>> that when this proposal reaches the ICG, "much of all that will disappear"?
>>> And what do you think would take its place?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As to whether it would take a week to review and respond to the MRT
>>> "structural analysis," I would suggest the following maxim "Don't let the
>>> perfect be the enemy of the good." (or, if you are a Sheryl Sandberg fan,
>>> "Done is better than perfect.")
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, if you have a proposal that is so straightforward and elegant
>>> in its simplicity that looking at this level of detail before adopting it
>>> would be unnecessary, I'm sure that I am not alone in welcoming the
>>> presentation of such a proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>>      *Gregory S. Shatan **|* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
>>>
>>> *666 Third Avenue **|** New York, NY 10017-5621*
>>>
>>> *Direct*  212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
>>>
>>> *Fax*  212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
>>>
>>> *gsshatan at lawabel.com <gsshatan at lawabel.com>*
>>>
>>> *ICANN-related: gregshatanipc at gmail.com <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> *
>>>
>>> *www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Christopher Wilkinson <
>>> lists at christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Greg: I think that all comes under my general comment about excessive
>>> complexity. including the thought that when all these CWG proposals reaches
>>> the ICG, much of all that will disappear.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Really, it would take me a week to respond completely and responsibly to
>>> your request, that which I am increasingly convinced would be a waste of
>>> time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry. I may try again later.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> CW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18 Dec 2014, at 18:23, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   All:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I strongly encourage everyone participating in this thread to contribute
>>> to the related RFP3 draft documents:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> MRT "Structural Analysis" Google Doc (
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1POnrfwYbviniyUC_vr4pGRZ-RiKkAMJ50ovXWv7M2yk/edit?usp=sharing
>>> )
>>>
>>> MRT Composition Strawman Matrix (
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l14hNILare9USehPaYBGaE5yy8tbjSwrRbAa9PHvmJ0/edit?usp=sharing
>>> ).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In particular, if you have had something to say about the composition of
>>> the MRT, please go the the Strawman and add your suggested composition of
>>> the MRT to the Strawman.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since our output will be documents, it is best for our input to be made
>>> in documents as well. There are a lot of good (or at least interesting)
>>> ideas here in this thread, but they will tend to remain "ideas" if they are
>>> not taken to the documents.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>    *Greg*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Carlton Samuels <
>>> carlton.samuels at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  This answer, IMHO, is a timely reminder of what is.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am ever bemused that reasonable men and women would continue to
>>> conflate, even confuse, two different concepts: ICANN, the corporation, is
>>> a different animal from ICANN, the multi-stakeholder organisation. The one
>>> has a different set of responsibilities from the other.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It was a struggle for the At-Large to understand in conceptualising
>>> expected behaviour of an At-Large selected director.  Because we struggle
>>> with understanding the socialisation of an American corporation.  And the
>>> fealty of the directors of the Board of such an animal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We may need ole Foghorn Leghorn's help here.  But it is time enough to
>>> learn this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Carlton
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==============================
>>> Carlton A Samuels
>>> Mobile: 876-818-1799
>>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
>>> =============================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Grace Abuhamad <
>>> grace.abuhamad at icann.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We looked into this and noted that the Continuity & Contingency Plan is
>>> confidential and cannot be distributed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Notes, transcripts, and recordings for RFP4 call are available here:
>>> https://community.icann.org/x/MYcQAw
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Grace
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Guru Acharya <gurcharya at gmail.com>
>>> *Date: *Wednesday, December 17, 2014 8:05 AM
>>> *To: *Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>>> *Cc: *"cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Avri,
>>>
>>> This was an action item for the staff from the call on 25th November. I
>>> believe they have already put in a request for the document with the IANA
>>> staff. Maybe Grace or Marika can update us on the request.
>>>
>>> "*ACTION staff : Ask IANA staff to share details on 7.3 that might be
>>> available for the public and/or online*"
>>>
>>> On 17 Dec 2014 17:29, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi,
>>>
>>> Is that 'transition to a "successor  contractor" plan' available to the
>>> CWG?
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>> On 17-Dec-14 05:26, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> Section C.7 in the current contract addresses issues of continuity of
>>> operations - particularly C.7.3, according to which ICANN should have a
>>> transition to a "successor
>>> contractor" plan in place at the moment
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>> On 12/17/2014 3:38 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>>>
>>>  As someone whose ICANN 'job" is supporting/defending the needs of
>>> Internet users, I will point out that security and stability of the IANA
>>> functions is of paramount importance for the ALAC as well.
>>>
>>> I look forward to the seeing how that can be assured in a potentially
>>> disruptive switch of the IANA operator where it may be that there is no
>>> continuity of either staff or systems.
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> At 15/12/2014 03:16 PM, Donna Austin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>  All
>>>
>>> I largely agree with Christopher. I think we are creating complexity
>>> where it does not necessarily need to be, but as we are here I want to
>>> reiterate a few comments I made on the RFP 3 call earlier today, and these
>>> comments come from a gTLD registry operator perspective:
>>>
>>> ·         Operational stability and reliability of the IANA service is
>>> imperative to the business operations of registry operators and as such
>>> this should be a critical consideration in any discussions.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:
>> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt
>> email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>>
>> The key to understanding is humility - my view !
>>
>>
>>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141219/25d3292f/attachment-0001.html>