<div dir="ltr">Hi Milton, all<div><br></div><div>Yes I've taken note of that.</div><div><br></div><div>Have a nice day,</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 12:02 PM Mueller, Milton L <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div class="gmail-m_1656672970249905325WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Amr, thanks<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I am at a loss to understand why none of us involved in EPDP were informed by the chair of the NCSG about the meeting. Sending out a notice is a very simple function.
The possibility of discussing things with GNSO board members is _<i>VERY</i>_ important right now because the Whois Phase 2 final report is before the Council and the board will have to make some judgments about how to handle it when the Council passes it.
I am very disappointed to learn that we lost an opportunity to meet with GNSO board members.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">At the very least, can our newly elected SG and Constituency officers take note of this? This (relaying notice of meetings to the list) is the kind of thing you
will be expected to do.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">--MM<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> NCSG-Discuss <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Amr Elsadr<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, July 31, 2020 6:35 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Private Calls for NCSG Leadership Committees<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi,<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You couldn’t be more wrong on all counts, Raoul.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This wasn’t an NCSG EC/Board meeting…, and in all my years with the NCSG, I’ve never heard of any such meeting take place. There are regular open NCSG/Board Meetings at ICANN public meetings, which anybody (you don’t even need to be an
NCSG member) may attend. This wasn’t one of those, though. This was another kind of meeting we also used to regularly have, which is a small informal meeting between NCSG members and Board members from the GNSO (CPH and NCPH appointees). These also used to
take place at ICANN public meetings, traditionally over breakfast, and were never limited to NCSG leadership participation only. We even had Fellows and Next-Gen participants attend those in the past. Basically…, anybody who was willing to get up a little
early and go to that breakfast. I don’t know where you got the <i>“This has been going on for many years already and business as usual”</i> from, but that’s a factually incorrect statement. Like I said, these have always been informal meetings, and never recorded
or anything…, but still very important.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Also, when you frame my concern as one of “transparency”, and claim it’s overblown, it makes me think you either stopped reading my email halfway through, or you just completely missed the point I was making. I never claimed that there
is a transparency (or lack thereof) issue. Never even mentioned the word in my email, so please don’t make this about something it’s not.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">My concern is with how the NCSG’s leadership is organizing these meetings in ways that are counter-productive to the work being done by our members. I gave the EPDP and ATRT as examples of where we have members actively working on issues,
where interaction with the Board is vital to how we make strategic plans about the actual work we are doing moving forward.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This isn’t about virtual handshakes and photo ops (or screenshots). This is about engaging with the Board members we appoint on critical issues like how they’re going to deal with a final report that the NCSG really needs to see adopted,
when we have “divergence” on 2 of the recommendations in that report by the EPDP Team. It’s about engaging with them on their plans to work these issues out with the ACs (ALAC, GAC and SSAC) that are doing everything they can to sink all the work done over
the past 2 years on that EPDP, so that they can work these issues out in closed rooms with the Board and staff, and exclude the NCSG from these discussions altogether. Y’know…, real NCSG work stuff, Raoul?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">When Matthew Shears was up for reappointment by the NCPH, I specifically asked him to make sure to hold these meetings with the NCSG in order to have an opportunity to discuss these very issues, and he complied. It’s our own Executive Committee
that failed to announce the meeting to the general membership. That doesn’t mean there was lack of transparency. The call was announced on the EC mailing list, which is publicly archived.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You also seem to have selectively ignored the second call we were not invited to, which was a call with a candidate from the ISPCP Constituency running for GNSO Chair. I hope I don’t need to explain the relevance of attending a call concerning
that election to you. If you feel I do, I’d be happy to. Now that Maryam has circulated the recording and attendance of that call, it’s clear that the majority of our Councilors did not attend it, including the incoming Councilors who will be voting for and
working with the new GNSO Chair. I always have a checklist of promises I ask candidates for GNSO Chair to make, such as a commitment to guard the GNSO’s right to develop gTLD policy recommendations, which is a right always under attack by ICANN ACs. If a candidate
is not willing to publicly make this commitment (as an example), I normally advise our Councilors to not back him/her as a candidate.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, Raoul…, are you getting a picture of what the big deal is?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Amr<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Jul 31, 2020, at 11:32 AM, Raoul Plommer <<a href="mailto:plommer@GMAIL.COM" target="_blank">plommer@GMAIL.COM</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think this demand for transparency is somewhat overblown here, Amr. The board has gotten together with NCSG EC and its chairs like with all the other SGs. What's the big deal? This has been going on for many years already and business
as usual as far as I can see.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Raoul<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 at 06:58, Olivier Kouami <<a href="mailto:olivierkouami@gmail.com" target="_blank">olivierkouami@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">+1 @Amr.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Warm regards<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Olévié<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Le jeu. 30 juil. 2020 à 12:40, Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@icannpolicy.ninja" target="_blank">aelsadr@icannpolicy.ninja</a>> a écrit :<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi,<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">From looking at the NCSG EC Archive (<a href="https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-ec/2020-July/date.html" target="_blank">https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-ec/2020-July/date.html</a>), I see that there are a couple of calls that are
taking place without any notice or invitation being sent to our general membership. I, for one, would have liked to attend both calls, and don’t understand why they’ve been kept from us regular members by the NCSG EC.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The first call, held yesterday (29 July) was apparently with Matthew Shears, and possibly other ICANN Board members too. I recall holding a call with Matthew when he was up for reelection by the NCPH (we were invited to that call, thankfully),
and recall specifically asking him to hold periodic calls with our members as a means to keep in touch, and facilitate communication with the NCSG. Matthew seems to be doing his part, but we’ve been excluded form participation by our own SG’s leadership (a
presumption on my part, so please correct me if I’m mistaken).<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Right now would have been a really good time to engage with our Board members, especially considering the EPDP finalizing its Phase 2 final report, and the Board having a seemingly strong opinion on one of the recommendations, which conflicts
with our own. There may be other topics of importance to our members, like the recent ATRT recommendations, and what the Board’s consideration of those will mean to the ICANN MSM.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Earlier today, it seems like a second call was also held (or was at least scheduled to be) with colleagues in the CSG regarding the election of a new GNSO Chair. Again…, this is an issue of great importance to NCSG members, particularly
those who are engaged in policy development in the GNSO. Why were we not invited to attend this call as well? I hope that the NCSG’s new incoming Council representatives were at least invited to this second call, since they will be expected to work with the
new GNSO Chair, and will also be expected to vote in this election.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I find this kind of disregard to our members’ participation to be incredibly counter-productive to the work we do, and don’t really care for explanations or excuses. I’d just really like to see it stop.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Amr<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>