Tapani, I've got one more:

Why should the Consumer Safeguards Director be asking the Community what 
he should be doing when the bounds and boundaries of ICANN's scope and 
mission are clear (e.g., not content)?   What happens when this 
conversation, because it is taking place in so many different corners of 
ICANN, does not have the Noncommercial Stakeholder Groups voice and 
concerns at one meeting, e.g., one webinar. Is this noncommercial voice 
now waived and these concerns buried or lost?

All, please free to edit and expand!

Best, Kathy


On 10/2/2017 12:31 PM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> Absent other suggestions I'm going to send Ayden's and Raoul's
> questions to the Board. I've rephrased and abbreviated them somewhat
> (intent being they should fit on the screen at once). Feel free to
> comment, or even still suggest alternative questions, but please
> be quick - deadline being over I intend to send these tomorrow.
>
>
> (1) After the harassment incident in Hyderabad ICANN has adopted
> new Standards of Behaviour and new community anti-harassment policy.
>
> How satisfied is the board are with the effectiveness of these
> measures, particularly in those instances where complaints have been
> filed with the Office of the Ombudsman and how is the Board monitoring
> the performance of the Office of the Ombudsman to ensure that
> harassment complaints filed are being appropriately handled?
>
>
> (2) For historical reasons that no longer matter, constituencies
> within Commercial Stakeholder Group appoint a total of four members to
> the Nominating Committee (Business Community two, others one each),
> whereas in Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group only NCUC appoints one,
> NPOC none. Consequently there are four CSG appointees and only one
> NCSG appointee in the NomCom.
>
> Could the Board to something to redress this long-standing problem
> and how soon could we hope it to happen?
>
>