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> >> *********************************************************** >> >> > >