[NCUC-DISCUSS] Summary of GNSO leadership call of 5 Aug, on governance and WS2 updates

farzaneh badii farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM
Mon Aug 30 10:38:38 EEST 2021 

Drafted two letters (ISPCP and Registry)  in the Google doc. Please have a
look and let me know if they are fine and edit as much as you like.

We probably need a better letter to the Board.


Farzaneh


On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 12:11 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello, all, happy to help coordinate these efforts.
>
> I have just opened a google docs placeholder for us to start drafting it:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S6_YV-UDyn_6bjvuvZPPUwwXP7zmiNFbXT5GmdphgM4/edit
>
> Do we have an additional volunteers to help draft the letter? Once we have
> the letter ready I can suggest a communication for us to send to ISPCP
> and the RySG.
>
> Best,
> B
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 11:14 AM Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix <
> rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for your input Farzaneh.
>>
>> I am transferring this thread over to the NCSG mailing list to further
>> discuss and coordinate the drafting.
>>
>> Do note that in the next 10 days or so there will be a call between RIWG
>> representatives and SG/Cs leadership. While the two letters on the table
>> here are not conditioned on whatever may transpire from that meeting, it
>> may further inform our stance. The EC will report on that meeting as with
>> the previous ones.
>>
>> Have a nice day,
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 23:49 Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Farzaneh
>>> +1
>>> ___________________
>>> REMMY NWEKE,  *mNUJ, mNGE, mGOCOP*
>>> Lead Consulting Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
>>> *ITREALMS Media* group [*Multiple-award winning medium*]
>>> (ITREALMS <http://www.itrealms.com.ng/>, DigitalSENSE Business Magazine
>>> <http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng/businessnews>; NaijaAgroNet
>>> <http://www.naijaagronet.com.ng/>)
>>> No. 39 Daudu Street, Oshodi-Lagos
>>> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, T: @ITRealms
>>> <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
>>> @DigitalSENSEng
>>> 2021 *Nigeria DigitalSENSE Forum on IG4D*, Thursday June 10
>>> <https://www.itrealms.com.ng/>
>>> 2021 *ITREALMS* e-Waste Dialogue, Thursday December 14
>>> <https://www.itrealms.com.ng/>
>>> @GOLDEN Tulip Hotels, Int'l Airport Road, Lagos
>>> <https://www.google.com.ng/travel/hotels/entity/CgoIo7qitJKSz_N2EAE?utm_campaign=sharing&utm_medium=link&utm_source=htls&ved=0CAAQ5JsGahcKEwi4nf7LzeLwAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBA&ts=CAESABogCgIaABIaEhQKBwjlDxAFGBoSBwjlDxAFGBsYATICEAAqCQoFOgNVU0QaAA>
>>> Former Vice President, African Civil Society on Information Society
>>> (ACSIS)
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and
>>> attachments
>>> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
>>> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept
>>> legal
>>> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the
>>> intended
>>> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and
>>> do
>>> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
>>> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 2:49 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Raphael.
>>>>
>>>> I looked over the objections from last year. I am not surprised by
>>>> IPC/BC response, they have always had an obvious interest in being overly
>>>> represented on NomCom while it is obviously unfair.
>>>>
>>>> I am surprised by ISPCP and the registry stakeholder group.
>>>> https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Implementation+-+Outreach
>>>>
>>>> First of all, I believe that the Board's fear of the empowered
>>>> community is misplaced. By design the empowered community can be initiated
>>>> easily but to get it finished they need others support which is not that
>>>> easy to obtain. I might be wrong. But I would like to hear more from the
>>>> Board. Secondly, how are we supposed to fix a wrong right by not being
>>>> blocked all the time by those who actually benefit from this unfairness?
>>>>
>>>>   I think we need to reach out to the registry stakeholder group and
>>>> the ISPCP and ask them why they think it is fine that the noncommercials be
>>>> under-represented on NomCom. Why do we need another group to study the
>>>> imbalance (RySG recommends this). It's obvious that there is an imbalance.
>>>> No need to ask IPC and BC. We know their rationale.
>>>>
>>>> Can we also write a letter to the Board? This issue can also be dealt
>>>> with at the NCSG level because this is about the imbalance of
>>>> representation between the commercial stakeholder group and the
>>>> noncommercial stakeholder group on NomCom.
>>>>
>>>> Lets:
>>>> - write a letter to the Board
>>>> - talk to ISPCP and the RySG (or write to them)
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 8:38 AM Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix <
>>>> rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Farzaneh
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the RIWG, they (apparently) have not consulted since the
>>>>> feedback was sent by various groups a year ago. No one knows what was done
>>>>> with that feedback. Specifically it was feedback from IPC and BC, and a few
>>>>> others; that feedback was negative, and the Board does not want to adopt a
>>>>> resolution that would contain the bylaws change wrt to the NomCom, just to
>>>>> have it become a mess at the Empowered Community step, because several Cs
>>>>> feel their feedback was disregarded in its entirety.
>>>>>
>>>>> That being said, that is my understanding based on the discussions
>>>>> during the call. I don't know the rest of the story and haven't followed up
>>>>> with NomCom review and the RIWG, and so cannot really say more on that. So
>>>>> the issue is not that something has been decided, I think, but more that
>>>>> the RIWG has been more or less silent for a year, or so.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for WS2 it's also hard to elaborate on that more without having had
>>>>> a look at what Org has in store re their "triage document" or however they
>>>>> want to call it. They refused to elaborate during the GNSO leadership call,
>>>>> despite the repeated demands by the ISPCP, Bruna, me, and a few others. I
>>>>> honestly don't know what recommendations are the responsibility of
>>>>> the community, as I said. So we'll see when said document comes out, and
>>>>> then we can come back on both jurisdiction and HRs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once we have that document out re WS2, we can come back to Board or
>>>>> Org on those two that were more important for us. As for the RIWG, I'd
>>>>> rather understand where they stand and what's going on before taking
>>>>> action...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 3:18 PM farzaneh badii <
>>>>> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Raphael,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As to NomCom, I do not understand what the Board is arguing here.
>>>>>> It's not clear that RIWG has reached out to the community and consulted?
>>>>>> How did they come to that conclusion? The RIWG did various consultations
>>>>>> with different groups and the imbalance between the representation of
>>>>>> commercials and noncommercials is very clear. If the NomCom review and RIWG
>>>>>> can't fix an unfairness in representation that is so apparent, why are we
>>>>>> even doing such expensive reviews? Is there a resolution or Board's minutes
>>>>>> about this? Perhaps we can have a meeting with Matt Shears, the appointed
>>>>>> NCPH board member?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As to the WS2, I see no mention of Jurisdiction. There is quite a lot
>>>>>> for Org to do for the Jurisdiction issue. Where are we on that? It's true
>>>>>> that OFAC is a complex and long process but it's been three years since we
>>>>>> submitted a recommendation to ICANN to find ways to apply for OFAC license.
>>>>>> The new gTLDs that have a direct relationship with the domain name
>>>>>> registrants have confiscated and cancelled people's domain names in
>>>>>> sanctioned countries. That even applies to the Public Interest Registry
>>>>>> .NGO... they don't even allow people in sanctioned countries to register a
>>>>>> .NGO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another is the Human Rights which I have not followed. Is that the
>>>>>> community responsibility too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest we have a meeting about both issues with the GNSO Board
>>>>>> members or send them a letter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 11:32 AM Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix <
>>>>>> rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please find below a summary of the most important points that were
>>>>>>> discussed during the GNSO leadership call that took place last week re WS2
>>>>>>> implementation, NomCom review, and a few other matters, on 5 Aug. Several
>>>>>>> persons from Org intervened on the call.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have a nice day,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ***
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- The NomCom RIWG has not been reporting for several months, and
>>>>>>> specifically it is not quite known at the community level what they
>>>>>>> did with the (overall negative) feedback they got on the
>>>>>>> implementation plan for the NomCom review, about a year ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a reminder, neither NCUC nor NCSG, nor NPOC submitted comments on
>>>>>>> that plan. The main change being considered is changing the allocation of
>>>>>>> seats within the GNSO, and not changing the total number of GNSO seats on
>>>>>>> the NomCom. Hence, the GNSO would have to figure out by itself who to
>>>>>>> allocate its seven seats to and on what basis.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Board will not move with the required Bylaw amendments regarding
>>>>>>> the NomCom as long as it's not clear whether the RIWG has properly reached
>>>>>>> out and consulted the community. It obviously does not want to have
>>>>>>> the Empowered Community shut down the Bylaws amendments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- There is a "triage document" that will come out of Org Soon(TM)
>>>>>>> regarding WS2 recommendations implementation, for those
>>>>>>> recommendations that are the responsibility of C/SG/SO. Org seems quite
>>>>>>> adamant that there is a lot for the community to do. Still, despite
>>>>>>> several questions from different parts of the GNSO, we couldn't get any
>>>>>>> specifics on this. It took staff more than 15 mins just to tell us the
>>>>>>> document in question is not ready yet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In case you missed it, here is where Org stands with the
>>>>>>> implementation of its "own" WS2 recommendations, from last May
>>>>>>> https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/an-update-on-work-stream-2-
>>>>>>> implementation-4-3-2021-en
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Additionally, we had a discussion, probably more than a year ago,
>>>>>>> regarding WS2 recommendations implementation, where it was clear that most
>>>>>>> of the recommendations were for the Board and Org to implement... We will
>>>>>>> have to wait and see what is in that document.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>
> --
>
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> Advocacy Coordinator | Data Privacy Brazil Research
> <https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/>
>
> Member | Coalizão Direitos na Rede <https://direitosnarede.org.br/>
> Chair | Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group at ICANN
> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/ncsg>
> Co-Coordinator | Internet Governance Caucus  <https://igcaucus.org/>
>
> Twitter: @boomartins <https://twitter.com/boomartins> // Skype:
> bruna.martinsantos
> bruna at dataprivacybr.org and bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210830/5da34061/attachment.htm>

More information about the Ncsg-discuss mailing list