Thanks everyone for the support, so we have as volunteers: Robin, Ed, Carlos, Norbert, Avri and stephanie. Rafik 2014-08-09 0:19 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin < [log in to unmask]>: > I too would like to join this group. I suspect my recent experience on > the last "expert" group might be useful. Thanks for the leadership. > Stephanie Perrin > > On 14-08-07 3:18 PM, Edward Morris wrote: > > Ditto. Thanks for your leadership on this Rafik. I know from past > conversations how close these issues are to your heart. Please count me in, > in whatever form the group takes. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 10:34:39 -0700 > Subject: Re: [council] FW: FYI - Recording and Transcript of 4 August 2014 > ICANN Accountability Leadership Discussion > > Thanks, Rafik. I very much support your suggestion that we form a > dedicated work team to focus on ICANN accountability and coordinate our > efforts in the most effective way. Should we set up a dedicated email > list and begin to formulate a response to staff's proposal? > > Best, > Robin > > On Aug 7, 2014, at 3:58 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > Hi , > > @Robin yes you can share with me (and in the list) your questions and I > will send them to staff. > > I attended the call and the tone and substance of the responses were quite > concerning. my first question there was about the role and involvement of > the board for selecting the experts and it was not really answered. > > At GNSO level, the different "leaders" of stakeholders group and > constituencies are discussing what should be done and following-up the > statement we made for the public forum in London ICANN meeting. I will send > more updates soon. > > CEO, board and staff represent a stakeholder or interest group in this > particular process and so we should design one where they can create less > interference so we need specific suggestions here to mitigate the risks. > the idea of cross-community group was also discussed but there are still > open questions because it is not just about changing the label from > community assembly. we are also still waiting for the summary of comments > from the public comments period. > > what I suggest: > - we as NCSG, should a setup an ad-hoc group to follow-up of our statement > on accountability but also individual comments from members. we need to be > responsive and following exclusively the process, lasting for months, with > dedicated volunteers who can volunteer and keep other members updated. so > this is proposal to be discussed and kind of call for volunteers. I welcome > suggestions on how to implement this. Registries SG set up its own internal > working group on accountability, we can adopt such best practices and > experiment (not sure if ALAC has its group too) > - as quick action : collecting and consolidating all questions and > comments regrading the draft proposal from ICANN staff such as questions > from Robin. > > Best Regards, > > Rafik > > 2014-08-07 3:19 GMT+09:00 Robin Gross < [log in to unmask]>: >> >> Yes, indeed. I listened to the call and was disappointed by staff's >> proposal to control the accountability process and defensiveness when >> called on it. We have been asking staff for information on what it would >> be proposing for a couple months (at GNSO mtg & last "leaders" call) and we >> were just told not to worry about it, that staff was busy compiling the >> input and would dialogue with us soon. Finally, without seeing the >> "synthesis" of the community input, we get this half-baked proposal from >> Fadi that calls for a process of two-tier accountability groups in which >> board-staff controls the group that "prioritizes" issues and "solutions". >> The 7 "experts" board selects for this group aren't really part of a >> "community" coordination group. Experts are great, but they should be >> selected by and report to the community (not board-staff) and not pretend >> like they represent stakeholders in the community. Also, staff's proposal >> doesn't quite say who will be making final decisions regarding the output >> of the groups proposed. Also, staff should be in this group in an >> informational / support / liaison sort of role, not as an equal participant >> with the community members. >> >> Rather than try to design the whole accountability process internally to >> create a process that board-staff could control the output of, the >> community should have been engaged in the formulation of this proposal, as >> we've been asking every time we get to speak to them. >> >> It seems like the input staff will now take is minor, around the edges >> and relating to the community assembly / working group -- and NOT the more >> important decisional body it is proposing. Hopefully we can get some >> significant changes and clarifications to this staff proposal for >> accountability at ICANN before Fadi declares that the community is aligned >> in support of his plan. >> >> Rafik, can you relay my concerns back to staff? (or if there is a >> mechanism for me to do that, I'd be glad to do it myself). But this >> accountability plan is half-baked and needs more input from the community >> before it should go forward. >> >> When will staff learn that trust must be earned and these sorts of >> constant shenanigans only hinder confidence and trust in ICANN's legitimacy >> to govern? >> >> Thanks, >> Robin >> >> >> On Aug 6, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> > Interesting reading >> > >> > avri >> > >> > >> > -------- Original Message -------- >> > Subject: [council] FW: FYI - Recording and Transcript of 4 August >> 2014 >> > ICANN Accountability Leadership Discussion >> > Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:34:10 +0100 >> > From: Jonathan Robinson <[log in to unmask]> >> > Reply-To: < [log in to unmask]> >> > Organization: Afilias >> > To: < [log in to unmask]> >> > >> > >> > >> > All, >> > >> > >> > >> > FYI. >> > >> > >> > >> > Audio not attached (its 16MB). All available at the link below. >> > >> > >> > >> > Jonathan >> > >> > >> > >> > *From:*Robert Hoggarth [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >> > *Sent:* 05 August 2014 18:30 >> > *To:* Theresa Swinehart; David Olive; Byron Holland; >> > [log in to unmask]; Jonathan Robinson; Louie Lee; Olivier MJ >> > Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Jun Murai; Lars-Johan Liman; Elisa >> > Cooper; tony holmes; Kristina Rosette; Rafik Dammak; William Drake; Rudi >> > Vansnick; Michele Neylon :: Blacknight; Drazek, Keith >> > *Cc:* Susie Johnson; Tina Shelebian; Global Leadership; Duncan Burns; >> > Samantha Eisner; Bart Boswinkel; Marika Konings; Heidi Ullrich; Steve >> Sheng >> > *Subject:* FYI - Recording and Transcript of 4 August 2014 ICANN >> > Accountability Leadership Discussion >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi All, >> > >> > >> > >> > Attached please find the recording of yesterday's discussion along with >> > the call transcript and the AC Room chat transcript. All three >> > documents are now posted on the CEO-SO/AC/SG Leadership Connect page >> > at https://community.icann.org/display/soaceinputfdback/Event+Calendar >> . >> > >> > >> > >> > Best regards, >> > >> > >> > >> > Rob >> > >> > >> > >> > <Transcript - Special ICANN Acctblty >> Session_20140804_SOACSG_Fadi.pdf><August 4 2014 Chat Special Session.pdf> >> > > >