Hi Pedro,
Good point. As I have spent a number of years as GNSO Council liaison
to the GAC, I became very aware of how the rapid turnaround of
GAC members is a major issue. Some GAC members are experienced
long-termers well up to speed with all the issues, but many GAC menbers
are junior civil servants who have been sent to an ICANN meeting
and told to read up on the issues on the flight there.
ICANN has been working closely with GAC leadership to do
outreach and capacity building.
Julf
On 20/02/2024 15:32, Pedro de Perdigão Lana wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> My two cents, on the first topic.
> ICANN seems like an interesting space to directly engage with government
> stakeholders to argue against those heavily multilateral governance
> models that have advanced these last few years, considering that we may
> presume GAC members have a better understanding (compared to other gov.
> authorities) of the Internet ecosystem and the multistakeholder model. I
> am not sure if ICANN really has this kind of opening (and other people
> on NCSG with a lot more background than me can jump in to correct or add
> something), but developing strategies on how to effectively get these
> GAC stakeholders so they may engage with other personnel from their
> governments (Telecom agencies, UN representatives, higher-lever
> authorities, etc) seems like a priority to be discussed with the Board.
>
> Cordially,
>
> *Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
> Lawyer <https://www.sistemafiep.org.br/>, GEDAI/UFPR
> <https://www.gedai.com.br/> Researcher
> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra)
> Board Member @ CC Brasil <https://br.creativecommons.net/>, ISOC BR
> <https://isoc.org.br/> and IODA <https://ioda.org.br/>
> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received
> by mistake, please reply informing it.
>
>
> Em ter., 20 de fev. de 2024 às 11:05, Andrea Glandon
> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> escreveu:
>
> Hello all, ____
>
> __ __
>
> *The due date of 21 February is for any topics/questions that NCSG
> would like to discuss during their joint session with the Board.____*
>
> __ __
>
> These questions below are for NCSG to consider and discuss during
> the joint session with the Board.____
>
> __ __
>
> - There is an ICANN CEO goal to have the organization develop and
> implement a communications and engagement strategy to address the
> WSIS 20-year review - what are the NCSG’s views on ICANN engagement
> priorities and strategies in this space?
>
> - Engagement with between groups and bodies in the ICANN space is
> continuing to evolve, including with the introduction of session in
> the Prep Week and breakout rooms on specific issues of current
> interest - does the NCSG have views on these new approaches or how
> to continue improving engagement strategies?____
>
> __ __
>
> The topics listed below in this email are topics that the Board will
> be discussing during their Prep Week session. ____
>
> __ __
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions.____
>
> __ __
>
> Thanks!____
>
> Kind Regards,____
>
> Andrea____
>
> __ __
>
> __ __
>
> *From: *NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Kathy Kleiman
> <[log in to unmask]>
> *Reply-To: *Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask]>
> *Date: *Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 07:56
> *To: *"[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>"
> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: ICANN79 questions to the board____
>
> __ __
>
> Hi Julf and All,____
>
> To properly discuss some of these questions, we need more
> information. Particularly for Topic 2, this is an "are we in the
> Board's head" question - and the answer is that we are not. /Could
> we ask that the Board, at this meeting (and not before), present
> something to us about what "Board-Adopted Policies" they are
> concerned about? /____
>
> /Which ones "do not address" the problems they were meant to
> solve... what is the Board's concern here? /Tell us and we can
> reflect back. ____
>
> My guess is that they are talking about PICs and RVCs and the fact
> that ICANN adopted Bylaws in 2016 that explicitly say it cannot
> "regulate" content. And of course, the New gTLD applicants want to
> regulate content. ____
>
> But really, do we have time to guess? ____
>
> Best, Kathy____
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------____
>
>
> "Topic 2**:**The Board’s Role & Responsibilities **w**hen
> Board-Adopted Policies Do Not Address the Problems They Were
> Developed to Solve* ____
>
>
> • Led by Becky Burr and Alan Barrett
>
> • Format of the engagement: discussion and input
>
> • Description: In this breakout room, the Board hosts will
> invite community feedback on how to handle situations where it
> becomes clear that community-developed gTLD policies adopted by the
> Board are superseded by subsequent events or are otherwise not able
> to, or can no longer, resolve the problems they were designed to
> address. There is currently no Bylaw or process for such a
> circumstance, other than the Board requesting that the community
> initiate another full policy development process. As the Board
> continues to engage with the GNSO on this topic, the community is
> invited to brainstorm possible solutions."____
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------____
>
> On 2/20/2024 4:10 AM, Johan Helsingius wrote:____
>
> We also need to submit our questions to the board by tomorrow (21
> February).
>
> Julf
>
>
> On 16/02/2024 17:57, Johan Helsingius wrote:
>
> ____
>
> The board is asking us two questions, the deadline is 21
> February.
>
> - There is an ICANN CEO goal to have the organization
> develop and implement a communications and engagement
> strategy to address the WSIS 20-year review - what are the
> NCSG’s views on ICANN engagement priorities and strategies
> in this space?
>
> - Engagement with between groups and bodies in the ICANN
> space is continuing to evolve, including with the
> introduction of session in the Prep Week and breakout rooms
> on specific issues of current interest - does the NCSG have
> views on these new approaches or how to continue improving
> engagement strategies?
>
> Julf
>
>
>
>
> /Sent on behalf of Tripti Sinha, Chair, ICANN Board of
> Directors///
>
> DearNon/c//ommercial Stakeholder Group///Leaders,
>
> **Please reply no later than Wednesday 21 February 2024**
>
> The Board and I are very much looking forward to meeting
> with you All, in Puerto Rico, for ICANN79 (02-07 March).
>
> It will be our first meeting of 2024, another important and
> exciting year for ICANN as we continue to work together on
> multiple fronts: the first phase of applications to the
> ICANN Grant Program to be opened in the forthcoming weeks,
> the new five-year Strategic Plan currently being drafted and
> of course the Next Round of new gTLDs, to name a few.
>
> As announced last year, wehave also continued working on
> enhancing our partnership with the community. For the
> upcoming ICANN Public Meeting (ICANN79),the Board is
> planning to hold an open engagement session, which we hope
> will be another opportunity for interested community members
> to engage directly with the Board on specific topics. *This
> session will be part of ICANN79 Prep week and will be held
> on Wednesday 21 February at 16:30 UTC.*
>
> This 60-minute engagement session will include three
> breakout rooms hosted by different Board members, each
> covering a different topic. Following a brief welcome
> plenary, community members will be asked to join one of the
> three breakout rooms for a 40-minute discussion with the
> Board hosts for that topic. Attendees will be able to move
> freely between the three breakout rooms. The session will
> conclude with all attendees coming together to hear each
> Board host’s summary of the discussions in their respective
> breakout rooms.
>
> **
>
> *Topic 1: FY26-30 Strategic Planning*
>
> •Led by Maarten Botterman and Chris Buckridge
>
> •Format of the engagement: discussion and soliciting input
>
> •Description: In this breakout room, the Board hosts will
> seek input from attendees on how the input from the
> community – including through the various environmental
> scans, strategic trend outlook sessions and other
> consultations – can form the basis of the strategic
> objectives and goals for the next Five-Year Strategic Plan,
> and what metrics should be included as part of the Plan.
>
> *Topic 2**:**The Board’s Role & Responsibilities **w**hen
> Board-Adopted Policies Do Not Address the Problems They Were
> Developed to Solve*
>
> • Led by Becky Burr and Alan Barrett
>
> • Format of the engagement: discussion and input
>
> • Description: In this breakout room, the Board
> hosts will invite community feedback on how to handle
> situations where it becomes clear that community-developed
> gTLD policies adopted by the Board are superseded by
> subsequent events or are otherwise not able to, or can no
> longer, resolve the problems they were designed to address.
> There is currently no Bylaw or process for such a
> circumstance, other than the Board requesting that the
> community initiate another full policy development process.
> As the Board continues to engage with the GNSO on this
> topic, the community is invited to brainstorm possible
> solutions.
>
> *Topic 3: Environmental Sustainability at ICANN*
>
> • Led by Sally Costerton and León Sanchez
>
> • Format of the engagement: discussion and
> soliciting input
>
> • Description: In this breakout room, the Board
> hosts will solicit community input on how to best advance
> ICANN’s environmental sustainability efforts, in line with
> FY24 CEO Goal 8. Drawing on the expertise of the community
> will help shape the dialogue for more sustainable planning
> for ICANN meetings and operations.
>
> The Board is very much looking forward to this new
> engagement opportunity and hopes that you will participate
> actively.
>
> It is to be noted that there will be technical limitations
> to the use of breakout rooms such as: no translation or
> transcription services available. Yet the ICANN Staff will
> support this engagement session and take notes. If this
> experiment is successful, we could replicate it moving forward.
>
> Meanwhile though, it is important that we continue listening
> to your specific needsduring our bilateral sessionsand we
> are also therefore keeping to the practice of asking
> questionsto _your_Group ahead of our joint session in Puerto
> Rico:
>
> *- There is an ICANN CEO goal to have the organization
> develop and implement a communications and engagement
> strategy to address the WSIS 20-year review - what are the
> NCSG’s views on ICANN engagement priorities and strategies
> in this space?
>
> - Engagement with between groups and bodies in the ICANN
> space is continuing to evolve, including with the
> introduction of session in the Prep Week and breakout rooms
> on specific issues of current interest - does the NCSG have
> views on these new approaches or how to continue improving
> engagement strategies?*
>
>
> We look forward to hearing your thoughts on this soon.
>
> We would be grateful if you could send to Board Operations
> ([log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>) the questions you would
> like the Board to address during our face-to-face
> meetings. Given the finite time available for these
> meetings, please list your questions in order of priority.We
> would also appreciate getting your questions no later than
> *_Wednesday 21 February, 2024_*.
>
> Looking forward to engaging discussions during Prep Week and
> ICANN79!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tripti Sinha
>
> Chair, ICANN Board of Directors ____
>
> -- ____
>
> Kathy Kleiman____
>
> President, Domain Name Rights Coalition____
>
|
