Hi Bruna,
Tx for asking!  I think we should include a third question:
3) Given that the Subsequent Procedures Working Group was unable to  
undertake the legal research to understand the impact of the 2016  
ICANN Bylaw changes on future propose private public interest  
commitments by future new gTLD registry applicant, what work and  
research will the Board undertake on this issue?  (We agree with the  
Board's letter to the Subsequent Procedures Working Group that ICANN  
cannot sign any registry agreement that violates it Bylaws.)

--------------
[not for inclusion in question above.]  Basically, we would like to  
make sure that content provisions are not adopted - and this protects  
ICANN because by its 2016 Bylaws, it cannot engage in content - so it  
cannot be accepting or enforcing absurd content provisions (or a lack  
of due process for registrants).  Real concern for many of our members  
under the direction some private PICs are heading...

Best, Kathy


Quoting Bruna Martins dos Santos <[log in to unmask]>:

> Dear NCSG,
>
> I'm sending you below the draft questions/talking points for our meeting
> with the Board at ICANN70, are there any other questions or corrections you
> want to suggest ?
>
> In case there's anything, please flag them to me by the end of today.
>
> best,
> B
>
>
> -------
>
> *EPDP*
> 1.  The EPDP has been a long, painful but very instructive process.  We are
> concerned about the tendency for matters on which we have conceded and
> tried to reach a consensus, being simply re argued on the platform of
> consensus at the next stage of the process.  The Chairs have a hard enough
> job chairing these difficult PDPs, but now they have to stop warring sides
> from opening up settled matters under fresh titles.  How does the Board
> recommend that we deal with this problem?
>
>
> *Pandemic and ICANN Community*
> 2.  NCSG would be interested in learning about how much money has the
> Organization saved on the absence of travel, as well as understanding the
> areas where this money has been redistributed.
> 3. What tangible steps the board thinks can be taken to address the high
> community burnout and decrease in participation from some stakeholder
> groups. Has ICANN conducted any recent assessments on community
> participation?  Our understanding is that there has been some decline in
> participation but we are not fully aware of the numbers and are worried
> that it poses a threat to the multistakeholder model.
> 4. Considering the vaccinations happening around the world - despite the
> initial stage we might still be - NCSG would like to know if the Org has
> any plans vis a vis vaccine passports, for when we finally reopen?  How
> have the conversations about hybrid meetings or return to present meetings
> been ?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> Advocacy Coordinator | Data Privacy Brazil Research
> <https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/>
>
> Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
> Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
> Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus  <https://igcaucus.org/>
>
> Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
> bruna.martinsantos
> [log in to unmask] and [log in to unmask]