Question 1:

How does the Board’s Organisational Effectiveness Committee plan on handling the feedback from the GNSO Review Working Party/GNSO Council on Westlake’s recommendations, particularly where there is conflict between what Westlake have recommended, and what the GNSO Working Party believes to be a more desirable course of action?

Presenter of the question: Amr Elsadr

 

Question 2:

Does the Board agree on the need for greater "Awareness and Capacity Building for Broader and Deeper Engagement in ICANN Policy and for a Secure and Stable DNS"? If so, what are the parameters under which this should be implemented?

Presenter: Klaus Stoll

 

Question 3:

The cross community working party on ICANN’s Corporate and Social Responsibility to Respect Human Rights has been discussing a human rights policy for ICANN, which would be needed to live up to the commitment to respect human rights encompassed in the CCWG report. How does the board envision a process for the development of a human rights policy for ICANN? Would there be dedicated ICANN staff working on the development of a human rights policy who could also function as a focal point on human rights? And if so, who would this person likely be? Would a Board’s human rights statement be part of endeavor, as suggested by the Board in your comments to the 3rd draft report of the CCWG on Accountability?

Presenter: Niels ten Oever

 

Question 4:

ICANN has invested on hiring policy staffers in the last year and has an enormous new capability for workflow, but the stakeholders do not. There is no way to keep up with what is "in the queue" and coming down the pike. How do we make the workload reasonable if we want the volunteer, multi-stakeholder model to continue? Is it based on ICANN capacity or stakeholder capacity?

Presenter: Kathy Kleiman