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

Tue Jan 26 16:19:38 UTC 2016

Dear Don,

Thank you for this, your apology has been noted.

Kind regards,

Terri

From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Don Blumenthal
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 10:14 AM
To: Christian Dawson <dawson at i2coalition.com>; Jennifer Gore Standiford <jstandiford at web.com>
Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership

I can't be on the call but I do have email access.

Limiting the leadership candidate group still concerns me. It's questionable for appearance purposes. I'm not suggesting that the final group can't be all from GNSO affiliated members but the process should be more open. In addition, the approach is somewhat arbitrary. I haven't seen the list of WP members, but do know that at least least two people with significant GNSO backgrounds are listed as Independent.

Last words from me on the subject.

Don

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 8:03 AM -0800, "Christian Dawson" <dawson at i2coalition.com<mailto:dawson at i2coalition.com>> wrote:
+1

On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Jennifer Gore Standiford <JStandiford at web.com<mailto:JStandiford at web.com>> wrote:

I also support Chuck’s recommendation. Thanks for the suggestion.

Jennifer Standiford

From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 8:10 AM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership

I also support Chuck's approach, and for the reasons he lays out. I would support a discussion of this issue upfront - our WG leadership team - before we take any names or nominations.
Best, Kathy Kleiman
On 1/26/2016 5:23 AM, Farell Folly wrote:
Hello Chuck,

I approve your approach. See you this afternoon.

Meilleures salutations,
--ff--

2016-01-25 21:56 GMT+01:00 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>:
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://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Chuck+Gomes+SOI

_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160126/a3fd9a6d/attachment.html>