Dear Niels

You asked:

"Isn't this ecactly what the civil society engagement strategy is for? I
think that's exactly what the board will answer as well."

My answer to this is simply that the present ICANN civil Siciety engagement strategy is misguided and is in need of urgent correction. I can not go into details here but basically:

ICANN's needs broad Stakeholder engagement. The vast majority of Internet ecosystem citizens are not present as engaged stakeholders resulting in dangers of under- and miss- representation. Existing barriers and challenges to broad stakeholder engagement are: a. ICANN centricity resulting in lack of relevance, b) Staff centred strategy, c) unsuitable materials and language, d) a lack of understanding volunteers realities and needs. To overcome the barriers we need to reverse the roles between ICANN staff and ICANN’s constituency organizations. we need to create relevance of internet governance for all users through the creation of win/win situations. This can be achieved if we make the DNS the focus of outreach not ICANN as a organization. To get the process started we need a communications plan that is focused on process and outcomes.

There is much to do and much to discuss with the board. Happy to provide more information on this and ask the question at the event.

Yours

Klaus

On 2/29/2016 5:19 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:

[log in to unmask]" type="cite">

Hi all,

On 02/29/2016 08:38 AM, Klaus Stoll wrote:

Dear Friends

I think Milton is spot on with this:

On 2/28/2016 10:29 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:

Tapani
As a veteran of many of these sessions, I want us to avoid wasting time and just generating animosity. 
I would strongly encourage us to ask questions that:
	a)  are forward-looking, and give us an opportunity to shape agendas and perceptions on things that are not already finished
	b)  involve requests for things that the board or staff could actually deliver for us

Any ideas about that?

For this reason I would like to propose a question on if the Board
agrees on the need for greater "Awareness and Capacity Building for
Broader and Deeper Engagement in ICANN Policy and for a Secure and
Stable DNS", and if yes, what are the parameters under which this should
be implemented.

Isn't this ecactly what the civil society engagement strategy is for? I
think that's exactly what the board will answer as well.

Cheers,

Niels

Yours

Klaus

E.g., is there are request we can make regarding the RDS (Whois) process that would position us better?
Are there any requests regarding the implementation process for the CCWG recommendations that will help us make sure things don't go off track? Are there any committees that we can ask to be on?
Can we ask them about the impending GNSO review and whether they agreed with our assessment of the biased Westlake report? Things of that sort

-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Tapani Tarvainen
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 6:10 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Questions to the Board?

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,

--
Tapani Tarvainen