[RSS GWG] Agenda/next steps

[Ted Hardie]

Dear Colleagues,

For our upcoming meeting, our first agenda item will be a vote to accept
RSSAC 058 as an input document.  While this may seem a bit formal, given
that we have been anticipating review of the document for some time, it is
clear that both RSSAC and the ICANN Board would like a clear statement that
it has been received by the GWG and will be taken into account.

Second, I think the group needs to discuss how to proceed, given the new
success criteria.  As Göran put it in the meeting I held with him and the
board liaisons, this information essentially creates a phase two to the GWG
process.  I plan to ask folks to share their thoughts in the form of a *tour
de table*, so that each member of the group has a chance to speak.

Lastly, I will suggest we consider requesting that the ICANN board update
the charter of the GWG to take the information in the document into
account.  My personal reading of Fred's answer and this text:

The RSS GS must ensure all RSOs have a significant say in policies that
govern them (in their capacity as RSOs). Related to discussion in Criteria
A.2, A.3, A.7.3, and Part C.

is that the logical consequence of these statements is that every current
RSO must individually accept all aspects of the new governance structure
and every significant policy decision that it makes from there on.

In other words, this process must achieve at least the full consensus of
the RSOs plus the consent of all of the other members of the GWG.  To me,
the simplest way to achieve that would be to reconstitute the GWG so that
each RSO has a representative in the working group.  That will better match
the processes of the GWG to the anticipated processes of the body it
specifies, and it will help move things along at a faster pace than the
current iterative method has moved.

In addition to making that change, I believe we should request that the
Board adjust this language:

The RSS GWG shall operate on the basis of consensus. For the purposes of
RSS GWG work and outcomes, consensus, to be determined by the chair, is
based on general agreement without any formal objections. If consensus
cannot be achieved, the RSS GWG representatives may make decisions and
adopt outcomes by vote. A vote passes with a simple majority (half plus
one) of RSS GWG representatives present in the meeting. Prior to all votes,
a quorum must be established. A quorum is a simple majority (half plus one)
of RSS GWG representatives.

to eliminate decision-making by vote when applied to decisions relevant to
the output document.   It's my belief that simple majority rule vote will
not meet the "significant say" test put forward in the success criteria,
and that shifting to full consensus of the GWG as required (rather than the
default) for its main deliverable would be a better fit.

Lastly, our timeline (
https://community.icann.org/display/soacabout/Work+Plan) is in clear need
of revision.  In the interest of transparency, it would be useful to
communicate to the community when they might expect to see the output.
One simple way to do that would be to take the current milestones and
restart them with January 2022 as the base date.

On a related topic, I note that many of us who accepted appointments to the
GWG did so with reference to a specific expected timeframe.  We have had
some turnover already, but it might be good to have each representative
consult with their appointing body to confirm their availability for the
next phase.

Comments and suggestions are, of course, welcome in advance of the meeting.

best regards,

Ted Hardie
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssgwg/attachments/20211129/ee4da37c/attachment.html>