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

Tue Nov 2 21:02:12 UTC 2010

After reviewing the transcript from the call last week, I believe we are moving in line with what was agreed to in the call last week. We had discussion about a number of topics, agreed to have two groups discuss topics of interest to the group (as reported in Alice's preliminary report message), and report back to the larger group. There was general agreement on this, as evidenced in the transcript, and I could find no objection to the proposed course of action.

What we need to do is discuss principles, scope, and collaboration in one group. The other group would discuss chair/vice-chair duties/responsibilities, how we would select a chair, and process generally.

Kathy has thoughtfully prepared a proposal for a different course of action, and one that may be as effective as the one we agreed to. Rather than change course at this time, I'd like to see us move forward with the agreed to plan. With that in mind I suggest as draft language the following for discussion:

Group 1 (principles, scope, collaboration)

Principles

*         Independent,

*         Accountable,

*         Transparent,

*         Responsible, and

*         Adherent.
Scope

To assess the extent to which existing WHOIS policy and its implementation:

*         is effective,

*         meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement, and

*         promotes consumer trust.

This assessment will include an analysis and determination of ICANN's performance against the AOC requirement that ICANN implement measures to maintain timely, unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS information, including registrant, technical, billing, and administrative contact information.

Collaboration

This Review Team will operate in a collegiate and collaborative fashion, making all decisions and recommendations by consensus. This Review Team will endeavor to reach consensus on all issues,
however, where consensus cannot be reached, minority opinions will be permitted and included in any reports issued by this Review Team.

Group 2 (chair responsibilities, chair selection process, process)

Chair Responsibilities

The Chair and/or Vice-Chair perform the administrative functions of the group. For example:

*         Keeps the trains running on time,

*         Helps work be properly structured,

*         Allows and enables a full and fair hearing for all members to comment,

*         Makes sure work is done,

*         Works to identify agreement and disagreement so as to move towards consensus, and

*         Determines consensus.

Chair Selection

This Review Team will attempt to select a Chair, and if desired a Vice-Chair through consensus. The ICANN President (or designee) may facilitate this process but may not otherwise impact the outcome.

Process

Unless specifically provided for in Process or Policies of this Review Team, Robert's Rules of Order, as revised, will be employed.

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 5:57 AM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Establishing our own track - and independence

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/20101102/56d2b03d/attachment.html 