NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed; boundary="Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi"
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:11:40 +0200
Content-Disposition:
inline
Reply-To:
Tapani Tarvainen <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Tapani Tarvainen <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Sender:
NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
----- Forwarded message from Adam Peake <[log in to unmask]> -----

Dear Tapani, Alan, Bill, Klaus:

The civil society engagement strategy has been updated to reflect comments received up to and during the ICANN Dublin meeting.  New version of the draft approach is online at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1>

I would be grateful if you would forward the message below and attachments to the NSCG, NPOC, NCUC and relevant At Large lists.  The covering note below is long, but I hope useful.

Many thanks,

Adam

Adam Peake
Senior Manager, Civil Society Engagement
ICANN


Hi Everyone,

Thank you for the comments on the civil society engagement strategy.  We have just published as revised google doc

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1>

This doc reflects comments on the first version, comments made during the webinar, meetings with civil society organizations and individuals over the past few months and meetings at ICANN Dublin.  We also considered how ICANN's business engagement team and regional engagement teams have developed contacts and content over the past few years.

In the new document you will see some text in square brackets. We have used this when there is a word or phrase that has not received clear agreement, comment or support.  We would welcome thoughts from the community on whether to include or remove in each case. If no comments are received in support we will remove the text in bracket by default.

3 files attached:  the original document made available for comment as a google doc in July (clean original), a document tracking changes between the original and the version online now, and a copy of the google doc with comments (copy made at the end of the Dublin ICANN meeting.)

The following provide an explanation of how changes were made.

Notes:

There was a suggestion to include "global" public interest, as the term isn't defined in ICANN, reverted to the more commonly used public interest, and also retaining global community as common ICANN usage.

Editorial changes made to emphasize that ICANN will strengthen diversity.  This emphasis is carried forward in a number of places in the document.

A new second paragraph added to explain the goal of strategy, and reflecting various comments received.

Addition of reference to representatives of noncommercial individual Internet users and academia with interest in Internet-related policy added.  Intent is to give clarity to the definition of civil society within ICANN. "Representatives of" is in square brackets, in this context it refers to At Large Structures (ALS), suggested as a more precise way to refer to individual Internet users, and it should be those ALS that self-select as being civil society.  Include or not?
* We are be interested in comments on whether the strategy should also include individuals or remain focuses on organizations?

The new sentence added to clarify that not-for-profit organizations serving the interests of commercial organizations, for example trade associations, would not be eligible for consideration as civil society under this definition. There was a comment about specific instances and organizations.  We suggest that the NCSG's and At Large's  respective membership processes judge whether or not an individual organization is/is not appropriately civil society. National situations lead to different organizational arrangements, charitable and not-for-profit status, etc.

Within ICANN responsibility for academia is divided between two ICANN staff groups: The Development and Public Responsibility Department (DPRD) is responsible primarily for education activities, organizing courses and such like, the global stakeholder group is responsible for engagement.

Editorial changes to remove the use of "our" and "we", etc. in the document.

In the section long term goals, the bullet "To increase awareness..." moved to the first position and "DNS and Internet governance ecosystem" added.  Clarification on mission relevance included, plus some minor editorial changes.

We expect to develop graphics showing how civil society is organized in ICANN and how it contributes to the policy processes.

Section1, structured approach:
In addition to the broad civil society engagement plan, support will also be available from the staff team for NCSG and relevant At Large Structures to sustain their communications and outreach plans.

Staff is aware of comments that better coordination is required between At-Large and the Global Stakeholder Engagement teams in their outreach efforts and participation in local events.

Section 2, tailored content and communications:
Emphasis added recognizing the importance of activities that focus on awareness raising for civil society organizations not yet engaged with ICANN.  There should be a balance between information that serves existing ICANN civil society organizations and those that are outside the ICANN circle. Need to develop content that clearly distinguishes between the missions of the ICANN civil society groups, this should be finalized after ICANN55.

The examples of content and communications listed were suggested mainly during discussions with civil society organizations, and also from members of the GSE team based on their experience of engagement with all stakeholders and regionally. Suggestions for other activities/communications types welcome. Please make suggestions about prioritization of these activities.

Section 3 engagement activities:

Acknowledging the comments received about the importance of ICANN Fellows and NextGen program participants, who should be encouraged to join and contribute to their relevant ICANN constituencies. In-reach will also be a focus of engagement strategy, this should include training and further support for ICANN volunteers.  Propose that when ICANN staff participate in national/regional IGFs they present a consistent message civil society involvement.  This should describe how civil society works in ICANN, civil society's focus areas, etc, and nor try to represent civil society opinions.

Internal organization:

A comment about coordination between the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions noted.

It was suggested that a small group of people from NCSG (NCUC/NPOC), At Large, and Fellows/NextGen if they wish, might form a small working party to help develop the strategy approach, working through monthly calls.  This contact group would bring information to the process from the broader community.  Volunteers for this group would be welcomed.

Annex:
Roadmap of external activities for partnership in FY16 will be maintained as a separate document and online calendar.  The calendar will be one of the functions available in a new constituency membership management system, expected to be available soon.  Thanks to NARALO for a list of events, these will be included in the overall events listing.  The community can share events relevant to civil society interested in ICANN and Internet policy, and suggestions for events where ICANN might organize a session or contribute in some way would be helpful.

The new membership management system will provide better visibility of current members, and their areas of interest and expertise.

There were comments about the need to translate some materials.  Suggestions as to key documents for translation, and into which languages would be welcomed.

Thank you,

Adam


Dear Tapani, Alan, Bill, Klaus:

The civil society engagement strategy has been updated to reflect comments received up to and during the ICANN Dublin meeting.  New version of the draft approach is online at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1>

I would be grateful if you would forward the message below and attachments to the NSCG, NPOC, NCUC and relevant At Large lists.  The covering note below is long, but I hope useful.

Many thanks,

Adam

Adam Peake
Senior Manager, Civil Society Engagement
ICANN


Hi Everyone,

Thank you for the comments on the civil society engagement strategy.  We have just published as revised google doc

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1>

This doc reflects comments on the first version, comments made during the webinar, meetings with civil society organizations and individuals over the past few months and meetings at ICANN Dublin.  We also considered how ICANN's business engagement team and regional engagement teams have developed contacts and content over the past few years.

In the new document you will see some text in square brackets. We have used this when there is a word or phrase that has not received clear agreement, comment or support.  We would welcome thoughts from the community on whether to include or remove in each case. If no comments are received in support we will remove the text in bracket by default.

3 files attached:  the original document made available for comment as a google doc in July (clean original), a document tracking changes between the original and the version online now, and a copy of the google doc with comments (copy made at the end of the Dublin ICANN meeting.)

The following provide an explanation of how changes were made.

Notes:

There was a suggestion to include "global" public interest, as the term isn't defined in ICANN, reverted to the more commonly used public interest, and also retaining global community as common ICANN usage.

Editorial changes made to emphasize that ICANN will strengthen diversity.  This emphasis is carried forward in a number of places in the document.

A new second paragraph added to explain the goal of strategy, and reflecting various comments received.

Addition of reference to representatives of noncommercial individual Internet users and academia with interest in Internet-related policy added.  Intent is to give clarity to the definition of civil society within ICANN. "Representatives of" is in square brackets, in this context it refers to At Large Structures (ALS), suggested as a more precise way to refer to individual Internet users, and it should be those ALS that self-select as being civil society.  Include or not?
* We are be interested in comments on whether the strategy should also include individuals or remain focuses on organizations?

The new sentence added to clarify that not-for-profit organizations serving the interests of commercial organizations, for example trade associations, would not be eligible for consideration as civil society under this definition. There was a comment about specific instances and organizations.  We suggest that the NCSG's and At Large's  respective membership processes judge whether or not an individual organization is/is not appropriately civil society. National situations lead to different organizational arrangements, charitable and not-for-profit status, etc.

Within ICANN responsibility for academia is divided between two ICANN staff groups: The Development and Public Responsibility Department (DPRD) is responsible primarily for education activities, organizing courses and such like, the global stakeholder group is responsible for engagement.

Editorial changes to remove the use of "our" and "we", etc. in the document.

In the section long term goals, the bullet "To increase awareness..." moved to the first position and "DNS and Internet governance ecosystem" added.  Clarification on mission relevance included, plus some minor editorial changes.

We expect to develop graphics showing how civil society is organized in ICANN and how it contributes to the policy processes.

Section1, structured approach:
In addition to the broad civil society engagement plan, support will also be available from the staff team for NCSG and relevant At Large Structures to sustain their communications and outreach plans.

Staff is aware of comments that better coordination is required between At-Large and the Global Stakeholder Engagement teams in their outreach efforts and participation in local events.

Section 2, tailored content and communications:
Emphasis added recognizing the importance of activities that focus on awareness raising for civil society organizations not yet engaged with ICANN.  There should be a balance between information that serves existing ICANN civil society organizations and those that are outside the ICANN circle. Need to develop content that clearly distinguishes between the missions of the ICANN civil society groups, this should be finalized after ICANN55.

The examples of content and communications listed were suggested mainly during discussions with civil society organizations, and also from members of the GSE team based on their experience of engagement with all stakeholders and regionally. Suggestions for other activities/communications types welcome. Please make suggestions about prioritization of these activities.

Section 3 engagement activities:

Acknowledging the comments received about the importance of ICANN Fellows and NextGen program participants, who should be encouraged to join and contribute to their relevant ICANN constituencies. In-reach will also be a focus of engagement strategy, this should include training and further support for ICANN volunteers.  Propose that when ICANN staff participate in national/regional IGFs they present a consistent message civil society involvement.  This should describe how civil society works in ICANN, civil society's focus areas, etc, and nor try to represent civil society opinions.

Internal organization:

A comment about coordination between the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions noted.

It was suggested that a small group of people from NCSG (NCUC/NPOC), At Large, and Fellows/NextGen if they wish, might form a small working party to help develop the strategy approach, working through monthly calls.  This contact group would bring information to the process from the broader community.  Volunteers for this group would be welcomed.

Annex:
Roadmap of external activities for partnership in FY16 will be maintained as a separate document and online calendar.  The calendar will be one of the functions available in a new constituency membership management system, expected to be available soon.  Thanks to NARALO for a list of events, these will be included in the overall events listing.  The community can share events relevant to civil society interested in ICANN and Internet policy, and suggestions for events where ICANN might organize a session or contribute in some way would be helpful.

The new membership management system will provide better visibility of current members, and their areas of interest and expertise.

There were comments about the need to translate some materials.  Suggestions as to key documents for translation, and into which languages would be welcomed.

Thank you,

Adam


   Dear Tapani, Alan, Bill, Klaus:

   The civil society engagement strategy has been updated to reflect
   comments received up to and during the ICANN Dublin meeting.  New
   version of the draft approach is online at
   [1]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_K
   V11mRlBcqWQ/edit

   I would be grateful if you would forward the message below and
   attachments to the NSCG, NPOC, NCUC and relevant At Large lists.  The
   covering note below is long, but I hope useful.
   Many thanks,
   Adam
   Adam Peake
   Senior Manager, Civil Society Engagement
   ICANN
   Hi Everyone,
   Thank you for the comments on the civil society engagement strategy.
   We have just published as revised google doc
   [2]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_K
   V11mRlBcqWQ/edit
   This doc reflects comments on the first version, comments made during
   the webinar, meetings with civil society organizations and individuals
   over the past few months and meetings at ICANN Dublin.  We also
   considered how ICANN's business engagement team and regional engagement
   teams have developed contacts and content over the past few years.
   In the new document you will see some text in square brackets. We have
   used this when there is a word or phrase that has not received clear
   agreement, comment or support.  We would welcome thoughts from the
   community on whether to include or remove in each case. If no comments
   are received in support we will remove the text in bracket by default.
   3 files attached:  the original document made available for comment as
   a google doc in July (clean original), a document tracking changes
   between the original and the version online now, and a copy of the
   google doc with comments (copy made at the end of the Dublin ICANN
   meeting.)
   The following provide an explanation of how changes were made.
   Notes:
   There was a suggestion to include "global" public interest, as the term
   isn't defined in ICANN, reverted to the more commonly used public
   interest, and also retaining global community as common ICANN usage.
   Editorial changes made to emphasize that ICANN will strengthen
   diversity.  This emphasis is carried forward in a number of places in
   the document.
   A new second paragraph added to explain the goal of strategy, and
   reflecting various comments received.
   Addition of reference to representatives of noncommercial individual
   Internet users and academia with interest in Internet-related policy
   added.  Intent is to give clarity to the definition of civil society
   within ICANN. "Representatives of" is in square brackets, in this
   context it refers to At Large Structures (ALS), suggested as a more
   precise way to refer to individual Internet users, and it should be
   those ALS that self-select as being civil society.  Include or not?
   * We are be interested in comments on whether the strategy should also
   include individuals or remain focuses on organizations?
   The new sentence added to clarify that not-for-profit organizations
   serving the interests of commercial organizations, for example trade
   associations, would not be eligible for consideration as civil society
   under this definition. There was a comment about specific instances and
   organizations.  We suggest that the NCSG's and At Large's  respective
   membership processes judge whether or not an individual organization
   is/is not appropriately civil society. National situations lead to
   different organizational arrangements, charitable and not-for-profit
   status, etc.
   Within ICANN responsibility for academia is divided between two ICANN
   staff groups: The Development and Public Responsibility Department
   (DPRD) is responsible primarily for education activities, organizing
   courses and such like, the global stakeholder group is responsible for
   engagement.
   Editorial changes to remove the use of "our" and "we", etc. in the
   document.
   In the section long term goals, the bullet "To increase awareness…"
   moved to the first position and "DNS and Internet governance ecosystem"
   added.  Clarification on mission relevance included, plus some minor
   editorial changes.
   We expect to develop graphics showing how civil society is organized in
   ICANN and how it contributes to the policy processes.
   Section1, structured approach:
   In addition to the broad civil society engagement plan, support will
   also be available from the staff team for NCSG and relevant At Large
   Structures to sustain their communications and outreach plans.
   Staff is aware of comments that better coordination is required between
   At-Large and the Global Stakeholder Engagement teams in their outreach
   efforts and participation in local events.
   Section 2, tailored content and communications:
   Emphasis added recognizing the importance of activities that focus on
   awareness raising for civil society organizations not yet engaged with
   ICANN.  There should be a balance between information that serves
   existing ICANN civil society organizations and those that are outside
   the ICANN circle. Need to develop content that clearly distinguishes
   between the missions of the ICANN civil society groups, this should be
   finalized after ICANN55.
   The examples of content and communications listed were suggested mainly
   during discussions with civil society organizations, and also from
   members of the GSE team based on their experience of engagement with
   all stakeholders and regionally. Suggestions for other
   activities/communications types welcome. Please make suggestions about
   prioritization of these activities.
   Section 3 engagement activities:
   Acknowledging the comments received about the importance of ICANN
   Fellows and NextGen program participants, who should be encouraged to
   join and contribute to their relevant ICANN constituencies. In-reach
   will also be a focus of engagement strategy, this should include
   training and further support for ICANN volunteers.  Propose that when
   ICANN staff participate in national/regional IGFs they present a
   consistent message civil society involvement.  This should describe how
   civil society works in ICANN, civil society's focus areas, etc, and nor
   try to represent civil society opinions.
   Internal organization:
   A comment about coordination between the Asia-Pacific and Middle East
   regions noted.
   It was suggested that a small group of people from NCSG (NCUC/NPOC), At
   Large, and Fellows/NextGen if they wish, might form a small working
   party to help develop the strategy approach, working through monthly
   calls.  This contact group would bring information to the process from
   the broader community.  Volunteers for this group would be welcomed.
   Annex:
   Roadmap of external activities for partnership in FY16 will be
   maintained as a separate document and online calendar.  The calendar
   will be one of the functions available in a new constituency membership
   management system, expected to be available soon.  Thanks to NARALO for
   a list of events, these will be included in the overall events listing.
    The community can share events relevant to civil society interested in
   ICANN and Internet policy, and suggestions for events where ICANN might
   organize a session or contribute in some way would be helpful.
   The new membership management system will provide better visibility of
   current members, and their areas of interest and expertise.
   There were comments about the need to translate some materials.
   Suggestions as to key documents for translation, and into which
   languages would be welcomed.
   Thank you,
   Adam

References

   1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1
   2. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1


----- End forwarded message -----


ATOM RSS1 RSS2