CCWG-IG/ Do we want a CCWG on Internet Governance?

[Olévié Kouami]

Yes, we want.
Le 14 juil. 2017 06:48, "Michael Oghia" <mike.oghia at gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi everyone,
>
> Forgive my belated reply. I largely agree with everything that has been
> said so far. I consider myself an active member of the CCWG-IG because I
> see the value of its work, but I'm not wedded to the current structure. It
> would be good to continue having such a space within ICANN, especially
> because I see myself being less involved in the domain space per se in the
> future but still seeing the value of what ICANN contributes to the
> ecosystem as a whole.
>
> Best,
> -Michael
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Rafik, my impression as an outsider looking in at the ICANN
>> Twitter account is that the organisation sponsors many events, many of
>> which have only a loose connection to ICANN's mission. This is not to
>> suggest that ICANN should not sponsor these events, but I would like to see
>> a list of which events are being sponsored by ICANN, whether the support is
>> in kind or in cash, and which staff are traveling to these fora and for
>> what purpose. If the CCWG-IG is not place for this to happen, I wonder
>> where might be?
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] CCWG-IG/ Do we want a CCWG on Internet
>> Governance?
>> Local Time: July 4, 2017 12:50 PM
>> UTC Time: July 4, 2017 11:50 AM
>> From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>> To: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
>> NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>
>> Hi Ayden,
>>
>> the CCWG-IG works closely with the Government engagement team from ICANN,
>> which is under Tarek Kamel responsibility. it is the team which submits all
>> comments, input to different IG related processes like CSTD, OECD etc and
>> tasked to handle IG related issues for ICANN.
>>
>> my understanding that sponsoring and supporting different events you are
>> mentioning are done by other staff and departments such as Global
>> Stakeholder Engagement division and they are not necessarily meant
>> endorsing specific positions by the organization. I recall the Board
>> working group on IG discussing ICANN financial support of IGF and national
>> and regional IGFs and that is related indeed to IG. I am not sure that is
>> the role of the CCWG-IG  in overseeing ALL events supported or funded by
>> ICANN
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> 2017-07-02 2:08 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>>
>>> Thank you for this update, Farzaneh. I was struck by how few people
>>> attended the CCWG-IG’s meeting in Johannesburg last week, and by how little
>>> of substance was on the agenda. I am also on its mailing list and it seems
>>> to me to be excessively focused on submitting workshop proposals for the
>>> IGF and WSIS. Personally I would like to see more reporting back to the
>>> CCWG-IG by ICANN staff of their involvement in external fora, and more
>>> involvement of the CCWG-IG in holding ICANN staff accountable for what they
>>> are advocating for and doing outside ICANN. I do not think that happens to
>>> a sufficient level at the moment. Take a look at the ICANN Twitter account
>>> at how many events ICANN apparently sponsors, many of which seem to have
>>> little to no relevance to Internet governance, and look at the very few
>>> reports back to the community that ICANN staff provide.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Ayden Férdeline
>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: CCWG-IG/ Do we want a CCWG on Internet Governance?
>>> Local Time: June 29, 2017 1:14 PM
>>> UTC Time: June 29, 2017 12:14 PM
>>> From: farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM
>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> As you know I am the NCSG rep on CCWG-IG. Here is an update on the
>>> status of CCWG-IG.
>>>
>>> As a background ( and Bill can correct me if I am not right) CCWG-IG was
>>> created a couple of years ago and has made statements on Netmundial and
>>> been active on raising awareness about IANA transition and ICANN
>>> accountability in the IG environment. People perceive its work as an
>>> awareness raising group which should bridge the gap between ICANN staff and
>>> Community regarding their IG related activities and also be mindful of
>>> statements from Intergovernmental organizations that might meddle with
>>> ICANN mandate.
>>>
>>> It usually organizes workshops at IGF, WSIS and other forums. ICANN
>>> staff has been very cooperative (especially Nigel Hickson) and are eager to
>>> work with the community for arranging such sessions. We also plan to be
>>> engaged with Board more.
>>> Find their report and charter: https://community.ica
>>> nn.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43984275
>>>
>>> There is, however, some controversy going on. Some groups are not happy
>>> with the work of ccwg-ig. Even after ccwg modified its charter to
>>> streamline its activities and its objectives, they still believe that CCWG
>>> might not be the right format for such activities. Some believe that
>>> CCWG-IG receives funding for its travel to various IG venues, which is not
>>> true. There is no funding for travel allocated to CCWG-IG.
>>>
>>> It has gotten to a point that we should now consult with our communities
>>> about whether CCWG-IG should continue its work and under what circumstances
>>> it should do so.
>>>
>>> Lets have a conversation about it here and I will compile your comments
>>> and relay them to the group.
>>>
>>> My opinion is that, CCWG-IG's members and participants should be active
>>> and should relay the work to their respective community. In many instances,
>>> when it comes to writing proposals and statements, very few people engage
>>> with activities. I think that has to be corrected. But I don't know how.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170714/315c5ebf/attachment.htm>