[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls

Aikman-Scalese, Anne AAikman at lrrc.com
Mon Dec 14 16:31:36 UTC 2020

Jeff and Cheryl,
It sounds as though you are saying there will be no Minority Viewpoints expressed from our deliberations when you publish the Consensus call.  Is that the case?

Then if that is the case, are you saying that only Leadership will determine when a Minority Viewpoint exists after receiving something you call a “minority report”?

How does the process you described on the call allow for the drafter of a proposed Minority Viewpoint to develop support – given that a Minority Viewpoint is not supposed to be an individual viewpoint but is rather supported by “a small number of people”?
From the WG Guidelines:
•MinorityView-refers to a proposal where a small number of people support the recommendation.This can happen in response to a Consensus, Strong support but significant opposition, and No Consensus; or,it can happen in cases where there is neither support nor opposition to a suggestion made by a small number of individuals. In cases of Consensus,  Strong support but significant opposition, and NoConsensus, an effort should be made to document that variance in viewpoint and to present any Minority View recommendations that may have been made. Documentation of Minority View recommendations normally depends on text offered by the proponent(s). In all cases of Divergence, the WG Chair should encourage the submission of minority viewpoint(s).

From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 2:15 PM
To: 'Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch' <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>>; 'jeff at jjnsolutions.com' <jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls

After listening to the Dec 10 call (which I could not attend), I have to say that normally a Minority Statement will require coordination with others to determine how many will join in the Minority Statement.  It is pretty much impossible to do that in 2 days.  You said on the call that WG members should know what the consensus designation will be but you also said that Leadership doesn’t know and that Leadership will have to take into account a number of different factors, not just the number of WG members who support a particular consensus designation.   Then you said we could be surprised to find that Leadership did not find a consensus and so we might not need to file a Minority Statement.  This is all very “loosey-goosey” so in fact, it’s not possible for WG members to draft and develop support for Minority Statements at this time except on issues that are major like Closed Generics, Auctions, etc.

It’s important, in drafting a Minority Statement, to know whether Leadership will designate the section as Full Consensus, Rough Consensus, or Strong Support.  A WG member can’t draft a proper Minority Statement without knowing what the designation is and reviewing notes/calls to say whether or not s(he) agrees with that designation.  And there is no way to develop support for that draft Minority Statement in our constituencies or otherwise within 2 days.
Thank you,
From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 8:37 AM
To: 'Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch' <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>>; jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls

+1.  Regarding the following, this is not at all a reasonable expectation:

Minority Reports are due just 2 days after the designation of Levels of Consensus.

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>> On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio--- via Gnso-newgtld-wg
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 7:11 AM
To: jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>; gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls

Dear Jeff and all

Thanks very much for this email!

Speaking personally, I’m afraid that the proposed timeline with consensus calls over the holiday break (at least in the Northern hemisphere) is not very helpful.

At least for those of us needing to do extensive consultations (be it inside a Government or within a larger community) such dates are completely unworkable.

Not sure how others feel about this…

Personally, I would suggest starting the consensus calls once we are back from the break, e.g. on January 4th.

In addition, I feel that for the same reasons (need for consultations etc.) the time allotted between consensus designations by the co-chairs and the deadline for submitting minority reports should be significantly extended (e.g. at least to one full week).

Hope this is doable…

Kind regards


Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>> Im Auftrag von Jeff Neuman
Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Dezember 2020 06:08
An: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls


The Leadership Team met a few hours ago to discuss a number of issues including how to get to the finish line……We are nearly there!

As discussed on the last call (about 24 hours ago), we are making the following changes to the Work Plan:

  *   11 December 2020
     *   Latest Redline of Final Report containing changes from all topics discussed to date as well as changes (if any) as a result of the 9 Topical E-mails
     *   Meeting of the small team on Auctions to see if there can be any recommendations to the Full Working Group
  *   14 December 2020
     *   Discussing (a) Auctions Topic (results if any from small team; (b) Conflicts of Interest, (c) Applicant Freedom of Expression, and (d) Dispute Resolution Procedures after Delegation.
  *   15 December 2020
     *   Comments due to 11 December 2020 Redline
     *   Release of Any redlines to as a result of the topics discussed on 14 December 2020
  *   17 December 2020
     *   Comments due to December 15 Redline
     *   Working Group Call (already on your calendars) to close out any last issues
     *   Content Freeze / Lockdown – Other than if there are any changes to close out last issues, all content is locked down for the Consensus Call
  *   22 December 2020
     *   Final Report is released to the Working Group
     *   Commencement of Consensus Call (See some notes below)
  *   5 January 2020
     *   Consensus Call Ends
  *   6 January 2020
     *   Designation of Levels of Support by Working Group Leadership Team
  *   7 January 2020
     *   Call of the Working Group to discuss designations, answer questions, and hopefully celebrate a job well done
  *   8 January 2020
     *   Challenges to Designation of Levels of Support by Working Group Leadership Team are due (if any)
     *   Minority Reports (if any) are due
  *   11 January 2020
     *   Final Report delivered to the Council
     *   Document Deadline for discussion during January’s GNSO Council Meeting

Some Notes

  1.  A longer note will follow in the next couple of days on how we will structure the Consensus Call.  We strongly recommend that if you were not on the last working group call on 10 December 2020 at 03:00 UTC, please do go back and review at least the first 15-20 minutes of the call. (Link to Call<https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2020-12-07+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP.>)

  1.  Although more details will be provided later:
     *   Leadership will be grouping the Topics into batches for purposes of the Consensus Calls.  We will not be voting on each recommendation / implementation guidance separately (as there are several hundred of them).
     *   We will do our best to only include in the batches the lesser controversial topics; stated differently, Leadership has a sense of which sections should be supported by either full consensus or (rough) consensus.  Of course we could always be wrong, but we will do our best.

                                                               i.      If there is a batch that contains a part that you do not support, then in the Consensus Call, we will ask you specifically which element or elements do you not support.    In other words, if we grouped topics 1,2 and 3 together and you indicate that you do not support the batch, you will be asked to specify which of the Topics you do not support, and which element(s) within that topic you do not support.  We will assume that the topics / elements you do not list are ones that you would support.  So being specific will be important.

     *   Topics where we can already foresee that there will be a difference of opinion (eg., Closed Generics, Mechanisms of Last Resort), we will make sure we have those topics in the Consensus Call on their own (i.e., not in batches with other topics).
     *   All expressions of support / non support during the Consensus Call MUST be submitted through the formal mailing list.  We will not be counting any responses to the Consensus Call that are not submitted on the list.  It is critical that all of the information is on the record and documented.
     *   The Consensus Call is NOT A VOTE – Leadership will not be determining levels of support based on the quantity of responses, but will take into consideration other factors such as the groups with whom an individual associates, etc.
     *   We will be following Section 3.6 of the Working Group Guidelines (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-24oct19-en.pdf).

  1.  Minority Reports are due just 2 days after the designation of Levels of Consensus.  We know that is not a lot of time.  However, given that we have had a draft final report, comments to the draft final report, extensive discussions of those comments of the draft final report, and you have seen several redlines already, we believe that if you disagree with the way the group is heading, you should pretty much know that now.  There is no reason to wait until the designations of levels of support to start drafting.  In fact, I am told that the ALAC has already been working on a minority report to certain topics for some time now.  Bottom Line – you can start working on any minority report now.  The worst thing that will happen is that you draft your report and there is a consensus call surprise where you find out you may not be in the minority and you decide not to submit the statement 😊

  1.  We are nearly there!!!!!!!!!


Your humble Leadership Team,

Cheryl and Jeff – Co-Chairs

With very special thanks to Martin, Annabeth, Robin and Flip who have been participating in Leadership calls for many months and providing valuable insight & of course to Steve, Emily and Julie, without whom, none of this would be possible


This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201214/b410886e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list