-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

I tend to see it as a waste of time that will only delay getting the
accountability work started.

Sure, if we want extra seats on the Coordination Group, like the GAC
does, or we want to support the delay so they can get that, lets send it.

Or if we are working with some of the US business interests that will
use every delay tactic in the book to avoid letting the transition
happen in 2015, lets send the letter.

Otherwise I think we should get on with:

1. signing up for the community group and starting to demand to see a
draft charter we can mark up.

2. figuring out who we want to represent NCSG on the coordination group.

For weeks the leaders had conversations with Fadi and co. about how
this was going to work. Before that there was a comment period.
Before that there was the ATRT2 report that said 'organize a community
effort'. And before that there was the ATRT1 report and along
succession of reports and requests to do something abut ICANN
accountability. I think it is time to take what has been proposed
after a long time of talking and many comments periods over the last
year and get on with it.

I am not in favor of yet another ineffectual letter that just slows
down the process and achieves little or nothing.

Now if there is some concrete thing we want them to change and we can
get buy in from the other SOAC-SG then sure lets craft a to the point
'we want you to do this' sort of letter.  but lets not just help in
feeding the constant delay machine.


avri


On 27-Aug-14 14:59, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> there was discussion between leaders of SOs/ACs regarding letter to
> ICANN CEO and the board about the proposal for accountability
> process. I copied the letter below. I am submitting it for review
> from NCSG PC and getting membership feedback. I would like that we
> act swiftly about it.
> 
> personally, I advise to sign it at least as community reaction and
> request for clarifying details left behind and not covered in the
> faq. but I want also  to get any additional proposal or comments I
> can share with the chairs of other groups.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fadi Chehadé, CEO, ICANN
> 
> Dr. Stephen Crocker, Chair, ICANN Board of Directors
> 
> ICANN Board of Directors
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Fadi, Steve and ICANN Directors,
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding ICANN’s announcement on August 14, 2014, Enhancing 
> Accountability: Process and Next Steps 
> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-08-14-en>,
>
> 
the Supporting Organisation, Advisory Committee, Stakeholder Group and
> Constituency chairs formally request additional time and
> opportunity to review and discuss the proposal contained in the
> announcement and in the subsequent FAQ’s 
> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/enhancing-accountability-faqs-2014-08-22-en>
>
> 
published on August 22, so that next steps can be confirmed with increased
> support from the ICANN community.
> 
> 
> 
> Recognizing that the ICANN plan is a brand new construct that was
> announced without a corresponding public comment period,
> substantial questions and concerns remain unanswered, including
> around the process to date and the plan as constructed.
> 
> 
> 
> The undersigned Supporting Organisation, Advisory Committee,
> Stakeholder Group and Constituency leaders are currently engaging
> our respective groups’ bottom-up, consensus processes at this time
> to develop and finalize a list of questions that will require
> clarification or correction.  As a result, additional opportunity
> is needed to ensure understanding of the proposal and the ways in
> which it is responsive to the interests and working methods of the
> ICANN stakeholder groups. We commit to submitting to ICANN staff
> our list of clarifying questions and comments within seven days of
> this letter.
> 
> 
> 
> Since the Enhancing Accountability process will affect ICANN’s
> future, as well as the range of stakeholders impacted by its
> decisions, we trust that this request will be received positively
> and lead to further engagement on this important matter to ensure
> that the SOs, ACs and SGs and Cs not only understand the proposed
> approach, but are able to endorse it.
> 
> 
> 
> Signed,
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJT/cupAAoJEOo+L8tCe36HMbwH/RwQ5vzyVXUHIPi3qMxgjCEU
cb0N2UzFOpprDThdzcIh41/joezXMgq3FrnIQPoAenao2GhpUqPu/KZw0VJhF8c+
pIvANxsOtsdtncwO9DDu7z0UzXftkH+B23BdbwL9pz/NgsNlpReHVNFumU5UXnsv
Km/YhLbydqKAEtehoYq+ShmcSgjj4ryzMXn/q5SsCzhilZWdGuzLack8iEHekPdv
uKm0atTEYXWnFUCPK5MVeq9R4FCXyRwlfT8Zni7D3xBf9/BRNbHDTvH5+JTGIsf7
MIAliXO+QHsXyBs+PThV/pA8DiSch4tluhEKT18J9yZA8brOrtL9TSqYR0Vq40A=
=wVA+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----