Greetings,

My follow-up question to Maria's.

As the GAC seeks earliest possible engagement at various levels of an even
more consultative, open, transparent and accountable ICANN institution, is
the GAC equally willing and ready to be open, transparent and accountable
on its internal activities, processes and decisions?

thanks,

Alex

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Maria Farrell <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Hi, Avri and Marie Laure,
>
> My question is about the Government Advisory Committee's future role.
>
> The GAC's report of its High Level Meeting in Toronto said it wanted ATRT2
> to look at: "Enabling engagement of the GAC as early as possible, and at
> various levels, within the ICANN policy development process".
>
> What form do you think greater GAC engagement might take earlier in the
> process, and how would you try to ensure its engagement in the GNSO and at
> the same time protect the multi-(equal)-stakeholder process?
>
> I hope this question is within scope, i.e. that it's ok to ask you what
> your 'ideal outcomes' from the ATRT2 might be on this issue.
>
> Thanks and all the best, Maria
>
>
> On 22 January 2013 13:33, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On 21 Jan 2013, at 16:48, Robin Gross wrote:
>>
>> > Therefore now have a 24-hour period to ask the two NCSG candidates
>> questions and to provide them with initial feedback about desired outcomes
>> for the ATRT (using this list beginning now).
>> >
>>
>>
>> Thanks Robin, for opening this topic.
>>
>> I think that the AOC reviews are among the most important work we do
>> outside of Policy recommendations.  And I think that the ATRT - being
>> responsible for reviewing, and then recommending  improvements on, the
>> accountability and transparency of ICANN is central to any evolution we
>> might someday see ICANN and its ability to become a free standing dynamic
>> organization.
>>
>> Even if this list does not have any specific questions for the two of us
>> who have asked for the NCSG endorsement, I would really like to hear about
>> issues that are currently on people's minds about the specific issues that
>> need to be covered by the upcoming review.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> avri
>>
>> Ps: Dan, I remember that I owe you an answer on Dynamic Organizational
>> Architectures which includes the issue of accountability.  While I am still
>> working on that theoretical answer, in a practical sense, I think that
>> accountable and transparent Accountability and Transparency Reviews, are a
>> key ingredient.
>>
>
>