Dear Ayden, Thanks a lot for this extremely detailed feedback. We will most likely be debating and discussing this issue Marrakech, and maybe we can address the issues you raise here comprehensively together . Warmest. Padmini On Mar 2, 2016 9:06 PM, "Ayden Férdeline" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear Padmini, > > Thank you for sharing this document with the discussion group. > > I write with full disclosure that I have not been a part of the Documentary > Information Disclosure Policy (DIDP) subgroup and have not been involved > with your work to date. However, moving forward, I hope I will be able to > contribute to your research and the drafting of your recommendations. > > This document is a great starting point but I'd like to suggest we add > some more evidence, adopt a more neutral tone in some of the sentences, and > strengthen the recommendations. > > I was wondering how the examples of best practices you cite in this > document were chosen? Given how many data protection bodies there are > globally, why did you decide to cite Finland’s Act on the Openness of > Government Activities on page two, for instance? I suspect it is very > liberal and I understand the desire to borrow best practices from a > faster-moving body. However, the cynic in me thinks I could identify > hundreds of similar bodies with worse or identical practices to what ICANN > has on the release of information in its possession, custody, or control. > It is perfectly reasonable to turn to Finland; I just think the argument > would be more persuasive if we could explain why this example is relevant. > You do this when citing India’s Right to Information Act — that table which > compares and contrasts how ICANN works in relation to the Indian government > is brilliant and its arguments compelling. > > Some of the language is also a little emotive. I know we in the NCSG are > probably on the same page on this topic, but phrases like “it cannot be > denied” are just asking for trouble if we send this through to those on > the CCWG-Accountability given the myriad of members present. (And please > correct me if I'm wrong here, as I don't have a lot of background as > to DIDP subgroup or who it reports to - this is being sent to the > CCWG-Accountability, right? Or is it going somewhere else? I have a feeling > I might be a bit lost here as to the intended audience.) > > Finally, the conclusion is just too short. It's one sentence and all we're > asking is that the CCWG-Accountability “acknowledge … these challenges and > suggestions so that transparency can be truly, meaningfully achieve[d]”. I > worry about this recommendation. It's easy for those receiving this > document to say, 'okay, acknowledged', and to take no further action. Can > we instead come up with 5 or 6 tangible actions we would like taken > instead? > > Thanks again to everyone who was involved in drafting this document. It's > looking great and with a few small revisions I think we will have something > very persuasive and loaded with evidence. If I can help in any way with > research or in drafting the actionable recommendations, I'm happy to do so. > And if I have mistaken the audience for this document or its intention (and > I do worry that I have!), I apologise for wasting your time, but please > understand I am fascinated by the topic and just not too informed as to how > this subgroup was established or of its history. > > Best wishes, > > Ayden > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Padmini <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ni6fhKZ421WS671EepjxsawHKkI__8fznhb2h32wIRg/edit?usp=sharing >> >> This is a document containing a summary of the reforms that the DIDP >> Subgroup had recommended over the course of the past few months. I have >> included research that I had done in this regard earlier, and incorporated >> the research and suggestions placed forth by Farzaneh, Karel, Brett, >> Michael, Robin, Pranesh and Ed in this regard. >> >> Please do go over it, and leave comments wherever you find it necessary. >> >> Hope this is useful as we begin deliberations on this crucial >> transparency tool next week. >> >> Warmest >> Padmini >> > > > Ayden Férdeline > Statement of Interest > <https://links.mixmax.com/b/t8ZU0ZEG1pMV3EDA6?rn=ikmbp1GZhBlI&re=gIt92YuwWah12ZAhWY1JXYi5WbkBnI> >