Bill, it is more than names. Since 2002 the Rule (there is only one
rule) states:

When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule,
participants are free to use the information received, but neither the
identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other
participant, may be revealed.

This is more than names. I cannot say "Chuck Gomez said this", and I
cannot say "the representative of Verisign said this " or even "the
chair of GNSO said this".

--c.a.

William Drake wrote:

Robin

Chatham doesn't make it secret, it just strips out the names of who

said what.  The content still comes out. Other SGs feel that's

important to them being able to participate (pertains mostly to

inter-corporate squabbling) and I don't think we could have gotten a

consensus council statement without it.  And that council statement

does call for two way info flow with AC/SOs, which was not in the

staff proposal.  So less than perfect transparency, but more than

there'd have been otherwise.

Best,

Bill

On Jan 20, 2010, at 12:51 AM, Robin Gross wrote:

Thanks for sending this draft council letter around.  It is very

good except I do not agree that the review groups should operate

under Chatham House Rules on confidentiality.  It would certainly

be a step backward for a group that is to assess the openness and

transparency of ICANN to operate in this secret fashion and

contrary to ICANN's promises of openness and transparency.

Everything else in the letter looks good however.

Thanks, Robin

On Jan 19, 2010, at 8:15 AM, William Drake wrote:

Hi

Please see the attached draft and let me know if you have any

comments etc.  Otherwise I'll propose a motion tomorrow...

Thanks,

Bill

<Draft GNSO Council response to the draft proposal on the

Affirmation Reviews Requirements and Implementation

Processes.pdf>

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Gomes, Chuck" <[log in to unmask]> Date: January 19,

2010 4:58:20 PM GMT+01:00 To: "William Drake"

<[log in to unmask]>, "GNSO Council List"

<[log in to unmask]> Subject: RE: [council] Draft Council

letter on the ARR

Please forward this to your SGs/Constituencies right away and

request feedback.  The Council will need to make a decision on

whether to submit the comments or some revised version of them

in our 28 Jan meeting.  If anyone wants to make a motion in

that regard, motions are needed by tomorrow, Wednesday, 20

January.

Chuck

-----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask]

[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of William

Drake Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 10:40 AM To: GNSO

Council List Subject: [council] Draft Council letter on the

ARR

Hello,

Attached please find the drafting team's proposed response to

the draft proposal on the Affirmation Reviews Requirements

and Implementation Processes, for discussion with our

respective SGs and in the Council.

Best,

Bill

***********************************************************

William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International

Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development

Studies Geneva, Switzerland [log in to unmask]

www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html

***********************************************************