thanks Maria - i have started a very rudimentary draft here:
http://piratepad.net/RNpRST03bS
it's open for inputs and comments
joy
On 10/12/2013 9:53 p.m., Maria Farrell wrote:
> Hi Joy,
>
> That'd be great, thanks.
>
> Here's what I drafted for the GNSO Council's response. It only covers
> PDP related stuff.
>
> cheers, m
>
>
> On 10 December 2013 02:44, joy <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Hi Maria - no, but great, and i'd be happy to helpf you on this. I
> think comments are due this Friday, Dec 13th. Shall we work
> offlist on some comments and then share? I suggested to Rafik to
> raise this idea at the ncsg policy call later today (which i can't
> make cos of the timezone).
> but very happy to help you with this
> Joy
>
> On 10/12/2013 9:19 a.m., Maria Farrell wrote:
>> Hi all, Did I say I was going to take the lead..?
>>
>> Maria
>>
>>
>> On 3 December 2013 08:07, William Drake <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> NCUC and I believe NPOC met with ATRT and we certainly
>> provided feedback, but no I don’t think anyone’s had the
>> bandwidth to write something up unfortunately. A couple
>> people said they’d take a lead, but…
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2013, at 8:44 PM, joy <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi - just following up to see if any comments were collated
>>> at ICANN 48 for input to the ATRT2 review at all?
>>> Cheers
>>> Joy
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: ATRT2 Review comments
>>> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 12:08:44 +1300
>>> From: joy <[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Organisation: APC
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all - for context in relation to the email I just sent :)
>>> - I volunteered today to collate suggested points for our
>>> NCSG comment to this review.
>>> I simply gathered up the following from either list
>>> discussion, input from Robin offlist, a very helpful summary
>>> on the GNSO council list by Maria Farrel, and our original
>>> NCSG comments (which noted positive progress since ATRT1 and
>>> expressed concerns about threats to ICANN's
>>> multi-stakeholder (MSM), bottom-up, consensus-building model
>>> of community participation and decision-making (citing the
>>> GAC Beijing communique and the TM clearinghouse as examples)
>>> and recommending the review team focus on practical
>>> operation of the multi-stakeholder model).
>>> Apologies if I am repeating what you know, but as a reminder:
>>> Overall on the ATRT2 report: imho it really is quite an
>>> incredible document - massive (main report 78 pages, total
>>> 233 pages) and comprehensive (these two things do not always
>>> correlate!) I think it is clear that submissions were
>>> listened to and appear to have been well reflected (others
>>> may correct us on that). I shared Maria's excellent and
>>> rather sobering summary and highlights of conclusions rather
>>> than repeat it here.
>>> There are new recommendations related to ATRT 1 (such as
>>> developing metrics for transparency and accountability,
>>> rules on transparency for staff, Board, GAC and SO/AC,
>>> proposed protections for whistleblowers) and arising from
>>> ATRT2 (eg increasing equitable participation, GAC
>>> involvement in PDPs, quite lengthy consideration of time for
>>> and accesibility of PDPs and working groups and need for
>>> imporvements, and new recommendations on financial
>>> accountability and transparency esp critiquing this in light
>>> ICANN's status as a not for profit organisation). The
>>> section reviewing the WHOIS (72-73) and SSR (p74) are also
>>> interesting, critiquing the processes and implemention.
>>>
>>> Overall, suggestions for the comments on this report are:
>>> * welcoming the report and thanking the review team for its
>>> work
>>> * a recommendation to mandate the multi-stakeholder
>>> bottom-up process
>>> * a comment about IPC's closed membership list (and this
>>> being in contradiction to transparency and accountability
>>> principles of the MSM)
>>> * reference to the tm+50 process and related developments.
>>>
>>> Do folks feel able to make any general statements supporting
>>> (or not supporting) the recommendations? Any thing missing?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Joy Liddicoat
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **********************************************************
>> 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]>
>> (w), [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (h),
>> www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
>> ***********************************************************
>>
>>
>
>
|