[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Announcement: No Working Group call this week

Tue Dec 19 23:35:58 UTC 2017

Dear Mary,

According to section 2.2.4 and 3.4, we have a "liaison":

https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-01sep16-en.pdf

who can assist and intervene when the working group is having
problems. I think the issue of anonymous polling fits the bill, as
it's entirely inconsistent with ICANN's transparency requirements, and
inconsistent with accountability. ICANN doesn't allow anonymous
comments to a PDP public comment period, but the co-chairs have
decided  they're going to using anonymous polls of PDP members to
guide policymaking.

Consider this email also a public appeal via section 3.7 of the
guidelines, of the decision to invoke yet another anonymous poll.
Assuming I do not hear from the co-chairs (I'm available by phone), I
intend to take it up with the chair of the Chartering Organization or
their designated representative. Please identify that person, and
their contact details.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> As no requests to hold a call this week have been made, please note that
> there will not be a Working Group call this Thursday 21 December. We will
> resume our discussions in January, in accordance with the timeline outlined
> by the co-chairs (below).
>
>
>
> The co-chairs have also reviewed the use of polls by the Next-Generation
> Registration Directory Services (RDS) PDP Working Group, since this was
> brought up during recent mailing list discussions on polling. Phil and
> Petter believe that the circumstances surrounding the decision to not
> utilize anonymous polling by the RDS Working Group are substantially
> different from the situation in our Working Group.
>
>
>
> In this case, they believe that an anonymous poll – with all results to be
> published to the full Working Group except for the identity of the
> respondent – will encourage greater participation and more candid responses,
> which will help guide their initial designation of the options for
> Recommendation 3 (although the expectation is that Recommendations 1, 2, and
> 4 are likely to continue to have at least consensus support).
>
>
>
> Finally, please note that once the co-chairs’ initial designations are
> published to the WG in January, all further discussion within the WG will be
> identified with those providing input and feedback.
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers, and wishing everyone happy holidays from the ICANN staff
> supporting your work,
>
> Mary
>
>
>
> From: Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
> Date: Monday, December 18, 2017 at 11:46
> To: "gnso-igo-ingo-." <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
> Subject: PLEASE READ: Co-Chairs' proposal for moving forward to determining
> consensus
>
>
>
> The following email is being sent on behalf of Philip Corwin & Petter
> Rindforth (WG co-chairs).
>
>
>
>
>
> It is the view of the co-chairs that our exhaustive discussion of the
> options for dealing with the potential situation of an IGO successfully
> asserting an immunity claim in a judicial context have reached an end point;
> that all issues relevant to our Charter have been raised, understood and
> discussed; and that further discussion is unlikely to yield additional
> options that enjoy consensus support, or sway the view of Working Group
> participants regarding which option should prevail.
>
>
>
> Therefore, the co-chairs intend to proceed in the following manner:
>
>
>
> If a significant number of WG members believe that further oral discussion
> of the three additional options that will be presented in a final consensus
> call is needed, supplementing the three that were presented for WG
> consideration in our preliminary consensus call held in October 2017, and
> that email list discussion is insufficient for WG members to understand the
> intent and effect of all six options to be included in the consensus call,
> we will hold a WG meeting on December 21st at our regular time. Please
> respond to the mailing list if you believe a call on December 21st is
> needed.
>
>
>
> On December 22nd, a second poll will be sent to all WG members. The purpose
> of this poll is to assist the co-chairs in determining the level of
> support/opposition that each option enjoys. This poll will ask all WG
> members to designate one of the six options as their preferred choice for
> addressing the IGO immunity issue. WG members will also be provided with
> means to add comments regarding that preferred choice, as well as each of
> the other five options. These comments can indicate support or opposition
> for each of the options, as well as whatever additional views a WG members
> wishes to provide. Responses to this poll will be anonymous, although any WG
> member will be free to share his/her response on the WG email list. The poll
> will remain open until Friday January 5th, 2018. The aggregated results of
> the poll, as well as all comments, will be shared with all WG members and
> will be included as a section of our Final Report.
>
>
>
> Once the poll closes, the co-chairs will review all responses and then share
> their views with WG members regarding the level of consensus that each
> option enjoys. We hope to hold the first meeting of the WG on January 11th,
> 2018 in order to discuss poll results and the co-chairs’ evaluation. The
> GNSO WG Guidelines provide all WG members with an opportunity to provide
> feedback on those proposed classifications, and the final consensus level
> for each option included in the Final Report will be determined under the
> procedure provided in the Guidelines. As soon as that process is completed
> we will publish a draft Final Report for WG review and comment, and will
> provide a reasonable time for all WG members to draft and submit Minority
> views. We will try to have our Final Report ready for submission to the GNSO
> Council in order to meet the February 12th, 2018 document submission
> deadline, at the latest, for its February 22nd meeting.
>
>
>
> Please let us know if you have any questions about this procedure. Thank
> you.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp