[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership

Tue Jan 26 15:45:28 UTC 2016

Kathy, the call details have just been resend by Nathalie. All members of
the WG should be receiving the email shortly.

Best regards,

Marika

On 26/01/16 09:39, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Kathy
Kleiman" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
kathy at kathykleiman.com> wrote:

>Hi Susan,
>Could someone re-post the call details?  I think there are many who
>joined the WG recently and have not yet received them.
>Best,
>Kathy
>
>Kathy Kleiman
>NCSG
>
>On 1/26/2016 10:23 AM, Susan Kawaguchi wrote:
>> I agree with Chuck that we need a diverse leadership but a larger team
>>may
>> pose other difficulties.
>>
>> This is a great discussion and I am encouraged that we have so much
>> interest.
>> Susan Kawaguchi
>> Domain Name Manager
>> Facebook Legal Dept.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/26/16, 5:40 AM, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
>> Gomes, Chuck" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
>> cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When I was thinking this through, I considered a larger leadership team
>>> but I think we need to be cautious about having a leadership team that
>>>is
>>> too large.  I have been thinking about another way we could increase
>>> diversity and representation of Constituencies, Advisory Groups and
>>>even
>>> those who are independent, but I think it is best to hold off on that
>>> until we get the leadership team in place and the WG kicked off.  A
>>> leadership team of four maps very well to the GNSO Council structure
>>>and
>>> I think that has important value, but that does not have to limit the
>>>WG
>>> in any way in terms of influence by those who are independent or who
>>>are
>>> not associated with a SG.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>> From: James Galvin [mailto:jgalvin at afilias.info]
>>>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 8:23 AM
>>>
>>> To: Gomes, Chuck
>>>
>>> Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I support this approach in principle.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don¹t feel strongly about the list of stakeholders but I am sensitive
>>> to Don¹s comment about restricting the leadership to those who
>>>represent
>>> an actual stakeholder.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How do folks feel about adding a 5th leader who is an ³independent²?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I have a conflict for the meeting today and will not be
>>> able to attend.  It¹s a one time conflict and I will otherwise be
>>> available.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 15:56, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> In my personal capacity as a volunteer for the RDS PDP WG I would like
>>>> to propose the following approach to the WG leadership that I think
>>>> would be very helpful in facilitating our productivity:
>>>> *         Have a leadership team consisting of 4 WG members plus the
>>>> ICANN staff support personnel.
>>>> *         Have one leader from each of the four GNSO Stakeholder
>>>> Groups (SGs):
>>>> 1.       Non-Commercial SG (NCSG)
>>>> 2.       Commercial SG (CSG)
>>>> 3.       Registrars SG (RrSG)
>>>> 4.       Registries SG (RySG).
>>>> *         The four leaders could serve in one of two ways:
>>>> o   2 co-chairs & 2 co-vice-chairs
>>>> o   1 chair & 3 co-vice chairs.
>>>> In recent years in the GNSO, a team leadership approach for WGs and
>>>> even for the GNSO Council itself has proved to be quite effective.  It
>>>> not only spreads the workload around but more importantly it allows
>>>> for a small team of experienced people to collaborate together in
>>>> leading the group's efforts. Here are a few examples where a
>>>> collaborative leadership team have been used:
>>>> *         The GNSO Council has a chair plus two vice chairs.
>>>> *         The Policy & Implementation WG had two co-chairs and two
>>>> vice-chairs.
>>>> *         The CWG Stewardship has two co-chairs.
>>>> *         The CCWG Accountability has three co-chairs.
>>>> By adding a condition that each of the leadership team members come
>>>> from different SGs, it ensures that the chairs and vice chairs
>>>> collectively have expertise about all four of the GNSO stakeholder
>>>> groups and creates a situation where the leaders are well versed in
>>>> the varying viewpoints that exist across all four groups as well as
>>>> differences within their respective groups.  I believe that this is
>>>> especially important for an area such as Registration Data Services
>>>> (Whois) that has been very controversial over the entirety of ICANN's
>>>> history.
>>>> For those that are new to GNSO policy development processes, any
>>>> recommendations made by a WG have to eventually be approved by the
>>>> GNSO Council, which primarily consists of the four SGs.  So Having all
>>>> SGs involved in the leadership of the WG from the beginning should
>>>> facilitate approval in the end.
>>>> It is important to remember that the role of the leadership team is to
>>>> facilitate bottom-up multi-stakeholder policy development in a neutral
>>>> and effective manner using a consensus based approach.  This of course
>>>> means managing meetings and online work to ensure that the WG charter
>>>> requirements are satisfied.  Hopefully, in most cases this will mean
>>>> guiding the full group in developing recommendations that most if not
>>>> all of the WG members can support.  But, after diligent efforts to
>>>> reach consensus, there is still significant divergence about certain
>>>> proposed recommendations, it will be the leaders responsibility to
>>>> decide whether there is sufficient support in the WG to submit such
>>>> recommendations to the GNSO Council.  Understanding this, it is
>>>> important that each SG endorse the person on the leadership team from
>>>> its group.
>>>> I hope that we can confirm whether or not there is support for this
>>>> approach in our WG call tomorrow.  If there is, then it will guide our
>>>> efforts in finding qualified members to serve on the leadership team
>>>> as well as how to structure the team (2 co-chairs + 2 co-vice-chairs
>>>> or 1 chair + 3 co-vice-chairs).
>>>> I would be happy to respond to any questions anyone has.
>>>> Chuck Gomes
>>>> P.S. - For those that do not know me, my Statement of Interest (SOI)
>>>> can be found here:
>>>> 
>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.or
>>>>g_
>>>> 
>>>>display_gnsosoi_Chuck-2BGomes-2BSOI&d=CwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r
>>>>=g
>>>> 
>>>>vEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=btok6CidsBB2RHMhBLM5ndveAQWEGTwEG8ahuX5ajjM&s=P
>>>>nG
>>>> Q_xQkr4kj_S4aOgzXpRr4N9MIKmdj5iisaOtHEV4&e=
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> 
>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailm
>>>>an
>>>> 
>>>>_listinfo_gnso-2Drds-2Dpdp-2Dwg&d=CwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvE
>>>>x8
>>>> 
>>>>xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=btok6CidsBB2RHMhBLM5ndveAQWEGTwEG8ahuX5ajjM&s=qht7x
>>>>1J
>>>> _g91Ch8BaVwk0lTgeF_X9NevjOKqQbiL0nkE&e=
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>> 
>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>n_
>>> 
>>>listinfo_gnso-2Drds-2Dpdp-2Dwg&d=CwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8
>>>xF
>>> 
>>>7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=btok6CidsBB2RHMhBLM5ndveAQWEGTwEG8ahuX5ajjM&s=qht7x1J_
>>>g9
>>> 1Ch8BaVwk0lTgeF_X9NevjOKqQbiL0nkE&e=
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>_______________________________________________
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg