So I would think that Bill is along the right track here, lets not try and ask open ended questions that allow response that don’t answer the question.
In an attempt to get more specific heres my suggestions:
* Does the board have any plans for new/revised/additional naming policy pr programs outside of the new gTLD program?
* Does the board feel that the IANA functions should remain within ICANN in perpetuity, if so should the community not have the right to periodically review the performance of the IANA and if required seek bids rom alternate providers?
* When performing its work, what situations does the board feel it it exercising its fiduciary responsibility, and does the board take into account the community input when making such decisions. (JG: Personal suggested addition, has the board received formal guidance on the boundaries if their fiduciary responsibility with regards to the IANA transition)
* On the topic of ‘Public Interest Commitments’ how does the board feel that PICs interact with existing bottom up policy making at ICANN. Does the board feel that there may be a conflict between PICS and multistakeholder policy development. How does the board plan to enforce PICs, specifically in the case where there may not be community agreement over the actions contained in the PIC?
* On the topic of gTLD auction proceeds, does the board plan to accept the community suggestions via the CCWG current being chartered or will the board unilaterally decide the uses for the sequestered funds? (JG: Bills suggestion below, my wording)
I might have missed some nuances in what people were looking for so feel free to change text as needed!
-James
From: William Drake
Reply-To: William Drake
Date: Friday 15 May 2015 08:54
To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>"
Subject: Re: [Poll] Reminder topics of interest for the ICANN Board-NCSG session in Buenos Aires : Deadline 15th May
Hi
On May 15, 2015, at 2:11 AM, Rafik Dammak <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
resending this email trying to capture and summarise , I may miss some parts, the ongoing discussion to pick-up topics. I think we have this rough list:
1. beyond new gTLDs: what next for ICANN naming policy?
We might want to specify more what we’re interested in here, since the history has clearly been that really broadly framed questions invariably lead to a) the Board asking us to be more specific, and/or b) conversations that go everywhere and nowhere.
1. why they think ICANN should have a monopoly on IANA functions - why the community should not be able to periodically review their performance and seek bids from alternate providers.
May I suggest simply “do they think…” We’ve been talking in other spaces about trying to dial back on framings that make them feel its an adversarial interrogation rather than a dialogue.
1. what the board thinks is, and is not, its fiduciary responsibility and to whom?
2. How "public interest commitments" relate to the bottom-up policy development process at ICANN. What are the Board's plans for enforcing these PICs? is e.g. copyright or other IP enforcement part of the plan?
If people really want to hone in on the nasty IPR stuff being slipped in rather tackle than the broad range of issues involved in a PI framing it might be good to say that too.
So we’ve decided not to discuss auctions?
Best
Bill
there was some points Global Public Interest with regard to GNSO made policy but also mention of implementation review role, @Avri do you have wording for that topic?
Any help to tweak and edit those proposals will be helpful. we should be more clear and explain the rationale behind those topics since board members are supposed to prepare few weeks in advance
We can send a short list to the board by the end of this week, while we continue the discussion and share opinions . That will be our preparation for the substantive discussion during the joint-session. With the new format proposed by the ICANN board, we would expect more interactive discussion.
Best,
Rafik
2015-05-07 22:08 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
Hi everyone,
please suggest 2 or 3 topics we should discuss with ICANN board during our joint-session in ICANN meeting.
Best,
Rafik
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rafik Dammak <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: 2015-04-27 20:10 GMT+09:00
Subject: [Poll] topics of interest for the ICANN Board-NCSG session in Buenos Aires
To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Hi everyone,
earlier that usual, we should find out the topics we would like to discuss with ICANN board in Buenos Aires meeting. we will try first to get several suggestions, then later we can narrow them to 3 topics for example. we have deadline for 15th May.
this will allow more time for us and the board itself to prepare for the session. The ICANN board chair sent also a letter with suggestion for new format for that session, but also for a Board - Stakeholders Groups plenary session with agreed topics. please find more details in the attached document. I do think that is good step to improve the dialogue between the community and the board
so feel free to propose topics and please add 1 or 2 lines to explain what you think we should discuss on those issues.
Best Regards,
Rafik
*********************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
ICANN, www.ncuc.org<http://www.ncuc.org>
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> (direct), [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> (lists),
www.williamdrake.org<http://www.williamdrake.org>
Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q
*********************************************************
|
