@Andrew - Indeed, typo my bad. Should have been focal point. Let's say
that both light and audio are waves so I got confused ;)
@Matt - Good point! I tried to transform this into new questions, how
does this look:
1.
We look forward to the Board making a Human Rights statement, as was
proposed by the board in the comments to the 3rd draft report of the
CCWG on Accountability, and we stand ready to work with you in
multistakeholder fashion and have already made suggestions as to how
that would occur and we appreciate the Boards commitment to making this
happen. Do you have any indication on where and how this statement will
be made?
2.
In the CCWP HR we've been working on the preparation for a human rights
policy for ICANN, which would be needed to live up to the commitment to
human rights which is proposed in the CCWG report. How does the board
envision a process for the development of a human rights policy for ICANN ?
3.
We appreciate and fully expect the support of the Board and staff as we
work on these important issues within and outside the framework of WS2.
Will there be dedicated ICANN staff working on the development of a
human rights policy who could also function as a focal point on human
rights?
Cheers,
Niels
On 02/26/2016 03:57 PM, Matthew Shears wrote:
> Hi Niels - actually... can I propose a different proactive approach -
> see inline:
>
> On 2/26/2016 2:30 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As questions I propose:
>>
>> - Will the ICANN board make a human rights statement as it proposed in
>> its comment to the 3rd CCWG Accountability Draft Report ?
> We look forward to the Board making a hr commitment and we stand ready
> to work with you in multistakeholder fashion and have already made
> suggestions as to how that would occur and we appreciate the Boards
> commitment to making this happen.... etc.
>>
>> - How does the board envision a process for the development of a human
>> rights policy for ICANN ?
> Again, we have done X work in the CCWP and we look forward to being able
> to work together with the board for determining the appropriate
> process.... etc....
>>
>> - Will there be dedicated ICANN staff working on the development of a
>> human rights policy who could also function as a vocal point on human
>> rights?
> We appreciate and fully expect the support of the Board and staff as we
> work on these important issues in WS2 etc. etc.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Niels
>>
>> On 02/26/2016 03:18 PM, Padmini wrote:
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I was also wondering, at Dublin we had raised our concerns about how
>>> representative the process is, and the Board had reaffirmed a commitment
>>> to go out on a limb to ensure that the participation diversity be
>>> increased. I recall both Fadi and Asha Hemrajani putting this on record.
>>>
>>> Could we raise the question of what they've done to this effect, and if
>>> the impact, this time around, has been more meaningful?
>>>
>>> Also, +1 to what Ed said, about not wanting ICANN Legal to come up with
>>> a nice legalese draft response.
>>>
>>> Padmini Baruah
>>> V Year, B.A.LL.B. (Hons.)
>>> NLSIU, Bangalore
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Rafik Dammak <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Kathy,
>>>
>>> If I can respond partly to that. the issue of increasing workload
>>> was raised more than 1 year ago by SO/AC leadership with Fadi and
>>> VPs like David during their meetings , with regard of lack of
>>> visibility and coordination of all ongoing processes with some
>>> initiated by staff. Some effort (in addition to other
>>> initiatives on
>>> other issues) started to compile the processes from SO/AC and
>>> trying
>>> to visualize them giving an insight about workload.
>>>
>>> There was also some presentation in a session in singapore meeting
>>> last year to take community feedback. David is managing those
>>> efforts . So I would expect he will give some updates about
>>> that. He
>>> also regularly attends our joint session with board.
>>> I will try to find the material and share them if it helps.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2016 9:17 PM, "Kathy Kleiman" <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would like to talk with them about work flow. ICANN has hired
>>> 100 policy staffers in the last year and has an enormous new
>>> capability for work flow, but we do not. There is no way to
>>> keep
>>> up with what is "in the queue" and "coming down the pike."
>>>
>>> I would expressly invite David Olive (as lead of ICANN's Policy
>>> Development Support Team) to be part of this discussion as
>>> well.
>>> How do we make the work load reasonable if we want the
>>> volunteer, multistakeholder model to continue? Is it based on
>>> ICANN capacity or stakeholder capacity?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Kathy
>>>
>>> On 2/26/2016 6:10 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> One regular event at ICANN meetings is that we get to meet
>>> the Board,
>>> talk with them about and ask them whatever we want.
>>>
>>> The Board would, however, like to know in advance what
>>> we're
>>> going
>>> to ask them, so they could better prepare for it.
>>>
>>> If you have suggestions for topics for our meeting with the
>>> Board in
>>> Marrakech, please let me know as soon as possible (feel
>>> free
>>> to post
>>> to the list or me directly, as you prefer).
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
|
