For those who might be interested in today's 1.5 hour call on the GNSO 
review.  It was lively.  From the NCUC perspective, I think it is fair 
to say that we did not think the Westlake representative was taking our 
concerns as seriously as they should have, but we have managed to get 
more time to review the report again before it goes out for public 
comments.

Stephanie Perrin

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[gnso-review-dt] MP3 recording GNSO Review Working Party 
teleconference Tuesday, 03 March 2015 20:00UTC
Date: 	Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:51:57 +0000
From: 	Terri Agnew <[log in to unmask]>
To: 	[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>



Dear All,

Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Review Working Party 
teleconference held on GNSO Review Working Party teleconference Tuesday, 
03 March 200UTC at

http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-review-03mar15-en.mp3

On page:

http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#mar

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO 
Master Calendar page:

http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

_Attendees:_

Jennifer Wolfe

Ron Andruff

David Maher

Edward Morris

Jennifer Standiford

Klaus Stoll

Amr Elsadr

Robin Gross

Rafik Dammak

James Gannon

Philip Sheppard

Bill Drake

Stephanie Perrin

Mike Rodenbaugh

Rudi Vansnick

Tapani Tarvainen

Sam Lanfranco

Matthieu Camus

Walid Al-Saqaf

Ken Stubbs

Laura Covington 
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Laura+Covington+SOI>

_Guest speaker_: Richard Westlake

_Apologies:_

Chuck Gomes

Osvaldo Novoa

_ICANN Staff:_

Mary Wong

Marika Konings

Larisa Gurnick

Charla Shambley

Lars Hoffman

Glen de St Gery

Terri Agnew

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

Thank you.
Kind regards,

Terri Agnew

*_Adobe Chat transcript:_*

   Terri Agnew:Dear all, Welcome to the GNSO Review Working Party on the 
03 March 2015

   Philip:Hello

   Jennifer Wolfe:Hello, Philip, and hello everyone, thanks for joining!

   Amr Elsadr - Observer:Hi all. Just to note that the NCSG members 
listed as members of the WP on the right-hand column of the screen is 
outdated.

   Rudi Vansnick:sorry for being late

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Rudi

   Mary Wong:@Amr, thanks for the note

   Amr Elsadr - Observer:@Mary: I'm not a member anymore. Stephanie and 
Bill now are.

   Mary Wong:Can we confirm which groups (if any) the observers on this 
call are? We note several participants who are not current Working Party 
members representing the GNSO SG/Cs.

   James Gannon (Silent Observer):James Gannon NCUC/NCSG

   Amr Elsadr - Observer/NCSG:Done. Sorry.

  Mary Wong:Thanks!

   Mary Wong:They have been sent to the list

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Ron Andruff

   Ron A:Apologies for my late arrival! Greetings all,

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Tapani Tarvainen

   Tapani Tarvainen:Thanks, and also aorry for being late. (NCUC/NCSG)

   Marika Konings:For those that would like to update their information 
(to include affiliation, or observer status), please note you can do so 
by going to the drop down menu in the attendee pod and select 'edit my 
info'.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:Unfortunately the faulty methodology used 
in the study makes much of the study not very useful.

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Sam Lanfranco

   Klaus Stoll:I do not seem to have received the comments from NCUC

   Terri Agnew:@Philip, your mic is not active

   Mary Wong:@Klaus, that may be an issue of server response/speed, so 
different WP members may receive messages at different times. It was 
sent to the mailing list by Glen.

   Klaus Stoll:Thanks Mary

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Matthieu Camus

   Matthieu Camus:Thank you... sorry to be late

   Larisa Gurnick:Stephanie Perrin, Phillip Sheppard and NCUC comments 
have been recieved in response to the working text so far.

   Matthieu Camus:Matthieu Camus, Internet Society France

   Larisa Gurnick:Please send your comments to [log in to unmask] 
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Walid Al-Saqaf

   Richard Westlake:I'm sorry I can't reallly hear SP

   Richard Westlake:Bettee!

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:As an active participant for more than 11 
years, I would have liked to have been interviewed by Westlake (I did 
fill out the survey).

   Marika Konings:@Stephanie - from my experience, we have actually come 
a long way since 5-6 years ago where indeed many WGs had many of the 
same people involved. We've seen  quite a few new people step up, 
including yourself, which I personally think is a really positive 
development.

   Amr Elsadr - Observer/NCSG:I still need to get around to joining one. :)

   Terri Agnew:Welcome Ken Stubbs

   Marika Konings:@Amr - last time I checked you were on quite a few ;-)

   Bill Drake:I should add I talked to people who started and gave up

   Amr Elsadr - Observer/NCSG::)

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:who decided who got interviewed?

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:where can we see the terms of reference?

   Larisa Gurnick:Please see 
https://community.icann.org/display/GR2/Community+Engagement+Meetings 
for a listing of extensive outreach and engagement activities

   Bill Drake:I and a number of other chairs were only interviewed after 
I complained about it on the SOAC chairs list

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:I'd really like to know who decided who 
was interviewed?  We need an answer to that question.

   Mary Wong:@Robin, the wiki page has the RFP: 
https://community.icann.org/x/aJLhAg

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):We tried o get a good 
respomse, we failed, it is what it is, is not an acceptable response.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:where to begin with all the inaccuracies?

   Larisa Gurnick:@Robin  - the working party provided guidance to 
Westlake throughout the process re: interview candidates

   Stephanie Perrin:It is extremely difficult to stream through the 
document quickly when juggling the scree, the chat, and our own comments.

   Mary Wong:To follow up on Larisa's point, staff provided Westlake at 
their request with lists of officers, past chairs, WG veterans etc.

   Larisa Gurnick:@Stephanie - I emailed a copy of the working text 
several minutes ago

   Mary Wong:Staff did not select or screen the interviewees, just to be 
clear.

   Bill Drake:thanks Mary. But chairs turned out not to be worthy

   Ron A:Sorry I dropped right after I finished my intervention.  
Dialing back in...

   Marika Konings:@Bill - I believe all chairs were invited early on, 
but not everyone caught the email ;-)

   Bill Drake:Marika, most chairs said they were not

   Bill Drake:we had a discussion of it on the SOAC list

   Klaus Stoll:How do we avoid that perceived inaccuracies are in 
themself inaccurate

   Bill Drake:actually I was told the staff discouraged interviews

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:How did Westlake decide who to approach 
for interview?

   Bill Drake:Klaus, checking facts works

   Mary Wong:To clarify, by "chairs" the list included GNSO and WG 
chairs and vice-chairs as well as SG/C/SO/AC.

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):Even if the invitations 
were such that's snowballing methodology and just is not acceptable for 
drawing larger inferences in a bounded community like the GNSO.

   Klaus Stoll:Bill, how about some facts not just "I was told"

   Bill Drake:I totally oppose the use of "I was told" in such a report

   Bill Drake:particularly when highly selective

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:completely agree, Bill.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:The decision to negative stereotype NCUC 
is not appropriate.

   Marika Konings:@Mike - the Policy & Implementation WG is not 
reviewing the PDP, but has recommended a number of processes that may 
complement the existing PDP

   Mike Rodenbaugh:thx Marika, still there should be some mention in 
this doc?

   Marika Konings:I believe there are references to that effort in the text

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:how were the interviews divided - equally 
among all constituencies?  I wasn't interviewed.

   Marika Konings:for example page 30

   Mike Rodenbaugh:thx. Marika.  Re interviews. only one IPC member was 
interviewed.  Seems like at least 10 from NCUC were interviewed..

   Mike Rodenbaugh:So we share Robin's question

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:sounds like questionable methodology, 
Mike, for making any recommendations.

   Bill Drake:I asked F2F in LA to be interviewed and was told no time

   Bill Drake:only after complaining on the SOAC chair list did I 
eventually get one

   Bill Drake:but this is a side issue

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:the other issue is the choice to 
selectively handle comments about NCUC.

   Terri Agnew:Laura Covington has joined audio

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:I'm (again) volunteering to be 
interviewed for this process.  As a participant for more than 11 years, 
I can add something (ex-ncsg chair, ex-gnso-councilor, ex-ncuc chair).

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):I'll volunteer to give 
Westlake questions on statistical sampling. Apparently Richard 
missedcthat class at Oxford.

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):classes

   Larisa Gurnick:@Richard  - please provide a list of  people 
intervied.  This will be included in the report - I understand.

   Mike Rodenbaugh:the list is already there in the Annexes

   Amr Elsadr - Observer/NCSG:These questions could all be avoided if a 
description of how informant selection could be included in the 
methodology description.

   Stephanie Perrin:THe list is there, who are they?  What stakeholder 
groups?

   Mike Rodenbaugh:I agree that would be helpful

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:Debra Hughes was interviewed?  She hasn't 
been in NCSG for several years.  Where did her name come from to be 
interviewed?

   Philip:Quotes reflect concerns and praise. They are the essence of 
good consultancy

   Marika Konings:@Stephanie - I believe that is information that still 
needs completing (note the column 'role' which I presume will identify 
their affiliation)

   Larisa Gurnick:@Richard - can you please clarify what information you 
plan to include in the "Role" column?

   Stephanie Perrin:And when did they arrive at ICANN? This is 
important, if you are looking at attracting newcomers, and you are not 
actually talking to any

   Marika Konings:@Robin - she was one of the founders of NPOC which is 
one of the GNSO constituencies

   Philip:Section 8i about constituencies. They only exist in the CSG 
and NCSG

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:She left NCSG years ago.  Where was the 
suggestion from to interview her (staff?)

   Marika Konings:@Robin - I believe there are other names that are no 
longer actively involved, but may provided some historic perspectives 
that were of interest to Westlake?

   Mary Wong:And to clarify/repeat - staff did not tell Westlake who to 
inteview and who not to.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:we should know WHO made the specific 
suggestions.

   rafik:@Marika better to explain the criteria that led to interviewes 
selection. for example I see many board members inclucded, looking to 
understand thw rationale

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:so Westlake selectively decided which 
comments to publish, thanks for the clarification, Richard.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:I also want to know if negative comments 
were made about other SG/Constituencies or only about NCUC in Westlake's 
effort.

   Marika Konings:@Rafik - that is a question for Richard/Westlake to 
answer, but as I understand it, it was a combination of suggestions that 
may have been received from staff, community members as well as aiming 
to get further input from those that responded to the 360 assessment.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:why are so many staff included as 
interviewees?  that is not appropriate.  I'd like to see the results 
with those comments deleted.

   rafik:@Marika and that is why I am looking for westlake answer :)

   Marika Konings:@Rafik - I only saw Ray as a board member on the list ?

   Stephanie Perrin:Bill Graham is a recent board member

   rafik:@marika including former too

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:Why didn't Westlake just go look at 
NCUC's webpage to see the diversity of its EC, etc?  Why wasn't a 
pursuit for facts used (only perceptions)?

   Marika Konings:@Rafik - some of the former board members have served 
in other roles too, so their perspectives may have been of interest in 
relation to those other roles and not necessarily their former board 
position ;-)

   Mary Wong:Again, to follow up on Marika's point, the Board members 
listed as being interviewed are either past or present members of the 
SIC - so some of them would have been part of the prior restructuring 
exericise.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:The facts are readily available on the web.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:why not use facts.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:sounds like Westlake is relying on an 
entirely "subjective" determination.  Why not also include objective facts?

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):Will Westlake please 
comment on the statistical validity of a survey of 27 people commenting 
on a group of 404 people?

   Ron A:As I understand it, any person in the community had the 
opportunity to bring their views forward regarding any part of ICANN GNSO...

   James Gannon (Silent Observer NCUC/NCSG):It seems on a blind read of 
the situation that there is major concern over the qualitiative and 
subjective bias of the review compred to a fact based quantative review..

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:It is a Fact that 27 different people 
have been on NCUC's EC for the last 10 years.  It is a verifiable fact 
that the NCUC EC includes 1 rep from each geographic region.  Not using 
these facts seems questionable.

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):I'll comment. The 
confidence interval of such a sample is 18.23% making the data 
completely useless.

   Philip:Comparing 27 to 404 in this context is completely useless.

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):Thanks Philip.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:why did westlake decide to ONLY go the 
subjective route?

   Larisa Gurnick:@Robin - Westlake methodology includes multiple data 
collection methods - quantitative and qualitative.

   Sam Lanfranco [NCSG-NPOC]:@Morris Technically, the C.I . is 18.23% if 
there is confidence in a sample being representative.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:Larisa, Richard just told us they decided 
to go the subjective route. Otherwise, what objective facts were relied 
upon?

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):@Sam. Good point. That 
number is the best case scenerio for the survey!

   Philip:A consultant's role is to report comments received. lets not 
dismiss this please

   Bill Drake:actually Philip I don't agree, the role is to do research

   Philip:Well maybe both

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):@Philip. Comments  
received - I agree. I'm having a problem with how they take faulty quant 
methodology, use that to select "representative" comments...I guess I'm 
questioning the 'representative' aspect. That's something we really 
don'y know due to some very poor esearch design and methodology.

   Stephanie Perrin:There is certainly an obligation to rely on facts 
and filter for bias.  No evidence of how potential bias is filtered, in 
a fractious multi-stakeholder community where it is required.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:good point, Stephanie.  How was "bias" 
accounted for by Westlake?

   Charla Shambley:You can view the 360 Assessment here: 
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/360-assessment-21aug14-en.pdf

   Stephanie Perrin:Thanks Charla, I have been through all that data.  I 
can bring it to my university library and demonstrate the bias, but 
frankly I do not see that as my job.

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:what criteria does westlake use for its 
"professional selection" of what to provide?

   Philip:Between bias and truth is perception.

   Bill Drake:I understood the criteria to be what they think is relevant

   Robin Gross [observer-NCSG]:and what do they think is relevant?

   James Gannon (Silent Observer NCUC/NCSG):@robin those criteria will 
be extremely important for everyone to understand any subjective 
professional selection reccomendations by westlake

   Ron A:Do I understand this right: Westlake is expecting comments on 
this draft - or a new one coming out?

   Robin Gross:On what evidence did Westlake base its recommendation 
that additional constituencies will increase participation?

   Bill Drake:faith based

   Stephanie Perrin:Totally agree with Mike

   Robin Gross:who is driving this bus any way?

   Bill Drake:totally agree Mike

   James Gannon (Silent Observer NCUC/NCSG):+1 Mike

   Ron A:Agree - 20-30 days for community review and response.

   Robin Gross:The community should be making this determination.  Not 
staff.

   Philip:Agree it is more important t get this right than to get this done.

   Robin Gross:Who is in charge?  The community?  Staff?  Westlake?

   Philip:Us surely

   Bill Drake:surely

   Robin Gross:Then we set the dates.

   Robin Gross:And we decide when our report is ready for prime tme.

   James Gannon (Observer NCUC/NCSG):Surely the WG need to be given time 
to review before the public comment period of the full and complete report

   Philip:Agree

   Bill Drake:I'd like to comment on a complete draft before it goes out 
the door for public comment

   Robin Gross:Frankly, we are going to need another entirely new report 
given the issues with this one.

   Bill Drake:"Quality trumps timelines" is a good mantra

   Robin Gross:And not exactly "bottom up"

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):Agreed Robin. The survey 
is methodologically troubled it can not be fixed.

   Bill Drake:Yes Stephanie it would be good if it were understood why 
people volunteer their time

   Philip:Agree completely with SP

   Bill Drake:20 hours per week of pro bono to get abused is not really 
a good deal

   Robin Gross:Westlake works for us.  We need to remember that.

   Ron A:@ Bill: you are referring to us, right?! ;o)

   Philip:In all ICANN hisory, this report on ICANN's policy development 
body is the most important.

   Bill Drake:Ron you got skin in the game!

   Laura Covington:agree with Stephanie and Mike R

   Edward Morris (observer/NCUC/GNSO Council):@Bill. Only 20?

   Robin Gross:Right, Phillip, this is enormously important.  Why on 
earth rush it when the community is uncomfortable with methodology?

   Bill Drake:Civil society people are crazy to try to work here.  We 
are treated better in the UN.

   Bill Drake:I mean that

   Robin Gross:Let's fix this and get it right.

   Bill Drake:Human Rights Council meeting now in Geneva.  CS people 
really having productive engagement, and not being crapped on for their 
efforts.

   Stephanie Perrin:yes

   Philip:Bye all. A very productive meeting. New call with new drfat 
please.

   Robin Gross:The community has spoken on this, with a rare one voice.

   Terri Agnew:@Klaus, I see your mic is muted

   Robin Gross:I hope these errors can be fixed in the next draft.

   Stephanie Perrin:Thanks for chairing a difficult meeting!!

   Ron A:Thanks all!

   Bill Drake:thank you Jen, good chairing :-)

   James Gannon (Observer NCUC/NCSG):Thanks all.

   Rudi Vansnick:thanks

   Robin Gross:Thanks, all.  Bye!

   Amr Elsadr - Observer/NCSG:Thanks all. Bye.

*__*