[Rt4-whois] Establishing our own track - and independence

Tue Nov 2 12:56:43 UTC 2010

Dear Whois RT,

Following the meeting last Thursday, the process has been moving away
from the path we set out leading up to Thursday, and I think it is
important for us to get back on track:

We heard from Brian Cute last week that his Review Team took their duty
very seriously, and it is good that we are able to learn from their
experience. The first thing they did was to define their own scope of
work - and they found that there is nothing simple or easy about it, yet
it was seen as a necessary condition to ensure the independence and
integrity of the work of the Review Team - and as I see it, that applies
to all review teams. As I see it, the first requirement for all review
teams is to be independent, and in particular independent of the body
whose actions we are reviewing: ICANN. Therefore, the process of our
review team cannot be driven by ICANN staff and/or its President, no
matter what good intentions or practicalities are there. 

1.      I therefore submit that our next step is elections.  If you want
to run, please do!  I run because I care about the Affirmation of
Commitments, I know the GNSO well, and my firm has allocated time to
allow me to handle the administrative and technical issues of the
chairmanship. And I know, as do you, that the substantive issues are
ones we must address together. 

2.      I strongly urge that the Scope of Work be stopped pending
elections, so that its result will be viewed as completely neutral and
independent. I further urge that all scheduling by staff be ceased until
we do it ourselves. We are responsible for our own goals, agendas, work
products and timeframes. We are the first of Whois Review Teams to
follow, and thus the first charged with the important responsibility of
translating the words of the Affirmation of Commitments into a Scope of
Work. (I should share that - even with two signatories of the
Affirmation of Commitments(!) - the Accountability and Transparency Team
found this a difficult process - with good faith disagreements with
ICANN defining its first months.) Therefore, once we have established
our own, independent leadership, I view the Scope of Work as our first
major task - and one in which we should ALL be actively engaged as it is
the foundation of all our work to follow. A possible way forward would
be: 

a.      Form the whole of the Review Team into 3-4 subgroups to review
(of 3-4 people each) to review and draft Scope of Work. I have talked
with many of us, and listened closely during our first meetings, and
hear different ideas about our scope of work and our mission here. As a
better way to know each other, and to ensure that all of our ideas
become part of a first draft, a first step could very well be a
discussion and comparison of the ideas about the scope of work from
those different subgroups. 

b.      Meet with drafters and signatories of the Affirmation of
Commitments, including Fiona Alexander of the US Department of Commerce
and others, as an important step in the process to translate the words
of the AoC into a scope of work for the Whois RT.

3.      In additional step, let's survey who of us is going to
Cartagena. If we find that many people of us do not currently have plans
to be there (and please note that flights are now full and hotels
booked), let's consider planning our first formal face-to-face meeting
in early January (with perhaps a very informal meeting in Cartagena for
those who happen to be attending). If many of us will be in Cartagena,
then we should use that opportunity, of course. 

4.      Furthermore: even if it turns out that most of us will be in
Cartagena, it seems to me that it is too early to meet with stakeholder
groups in Cartagena (as recently suggested) as we are simply not far
enough in our own development process. By the San Francisco ICANN
meeting in March, we should be ready to meet - hopefully, with a
well-grounded set of questions and ideas for public review and comment.

5.      Establish a way to collect, review and work with the excellent
ideas being shared by our members.

Again, I strongly urge that development of the Scope of Work be stopped
pending elections, so that it can be developed under a leadership viewed
as completely neutral and independent. I further urge that all
scheduling by staff be ceased until we do it ourselves. With thanks to
ICANN Staff, it is we on the RT who are responsible for our own goals,
agendas, work products and timeframes.

Respectfully submitted,

Kathy Kleiman, Esq.

Director of Policy

.ORG The Public Interest Registry

1775 Wiehle Avenue, Suite 200

Reston, Virginia 20190  USA

Main: +1 703 889-5778  | Direct: +1 703 889-5756  

Mobile: +1 703 371-6846 | Fax: +1 703.889.5779  

E:  kkleiman at pir.org <mailto:clee at pir.org>        |  W:  www.pir.org
<http://www.pir.org/> 

Visit us online!

Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz! <http://www.pir.org/orgbuzz> 

Find us on Facebook | dotorg
<http://www.facebook.com/pages/dotorg/203294399456?v=wall> 

See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr <http://flickr.com/orgbuzz> 

See our video library on YouTube <http://youtube.com/orgbuzz> 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:

Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If
received in error, please inform sender and then delete.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101102/56a237a9/attachment.html 