Fwd: [ECAdmin] Petition for an EC Request Reconsideration on on the postponement of ATRT4

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hi Tomslin,

What you say in your last statement with regards to option, does sound to
me like a discussion that needs to happen during the community discussion
phase as part of the reconsideration process, if there is no support to
even get past the current stage how does the community formally get on to
the next.

Perhaps it would be more strategic to support and then discuss any further
modification of what the community wants ATRT4 and beyond to look like,
unless NCSG is saying it's fine for the Board to go against its own bylaw
and no further ICANN accountability is due.

Regards

On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 at 22:36, Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi James, all,
>
> I am with you here from a strategy point of view. My view (and I attempted
> to convey this during our bilateral with ALAC in Prague) is that narrowly
> focusing only on the sole issue of the bylaw violation (of not starting
> ATRT4), and not the underlying problem of how reviews are done (including
> timely implementation of recommendations that come out of each review cycle
> before the next) is not the better strategy overall.
>
> I am aware ALAC argues that ATRT4 SHOULD be used for this purpose (of
> reviewing the review strategy), but since per the bylaws, we cannot
> pre-scope what ATRT4 can or can not do, I believe the risks outweigh the
> benefits here, since nothing stops any ATRT4 member from asking for a wider
> scope similar to ATRT3 or more, thereby putting us in the same position or
> worse.
>
> The option to first put together a community group with a predictable
> narrow scope to review the reviews strategy and how they are done, before
> starting the next review cycle seems to me the better holistic option.
>
> Remain blessed,
> Tomslin
>
> On Sat, 21 June 2025, 18:08 James Gannon, <james at policywonk.xyz> wrote:
>
>> Agreed. This would not have my support.
>>
>> --
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 09:01 Johan Helsingius <
>> 00001963cc94b85a-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think we should support it.
>>>
>>>         Julf
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21/06/2025 09:20, Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote:
>>> > **PLEASE READ**
>>> >
>>> > For discussion  below. We must decide as a stakeholder group whether
>>> we
>>> > support this request or not.
>>> >
>>> > Tomslin
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > From: *Tomslin Samme-Nlar* <mesumbeslin at gmail.com
>>> > <mailto:mesumbeslin at gmail.com>>
>>> > Date: Sat, 21 June 2025, 17:17
>>> > Subject: Fwd: [ECAdmin] Petition for an EC Request Reconsideration on
>>> on
>>> > the postponement of ATRT4
>>> > To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org
>>> > <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Dear Councilors,
>>> >
>>> > As you will find attached, ALAC has initiated a
>>> CommunityReconsideration
>>> > Request Petition on the Board’s postponement of ATRT4. As a result,
>>> ALAC
>>> > is seeking support from other Decision Participants of the EC for this
>>> > request.
>>> >
>>> > According ICANN Bylaws Annex D, Section 4.3, the GNSO as Decision
>>> > Parricipant has 21 days to decide if we support the request or not.
>>> This
>>> > period began on 19th June.
>>> >
>>> > I will discuss with leadership on how best we can address this request
>>> > within the time frame since our regular council meeting might be a bit
>>> > late for a discussion. In the meantime, please circulate with your
>>> SG/Cs.
>>> >
>>> > Remain blessed,
>>> > Tomslin
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > From: *Jonathan Zuck via ECAdmin* <ecadmin at icann.org
>>> > <mailto:ecadmin at icann.org>>
>>> > Date: Fri, 20 June 2025, 02:17
>>> > Subject: [ECAdmin] Petition for an EC Request Reconsideration on on
>>> the
>>> > postponement of ATRT4
>>> > To: Alejandra Reynoso Barral via Soac-leadership <soac-
>>> > leadership at icann.org <mailto:soac-leadership at icann.org>>
>>> > Cc: Christian Wheeler via ECAdmin <ecadmin at icann.org
>>> > <mailto:ecadmin at icann.org>>, Justine Chew <
>>> justine.chew.icann at gmail.com
>>> > <mailto:justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>>, Claire C. Craig
>>> > <claireccraig at gmail.com <mailto:claireccraig at gmail.com>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Fellow EC Chairs and EC Administrator
>>> >
>>> > Please find attached the ALAC initiated petition for an EC Request for
>>> > Reconsideration on the matter of reviews. Please let me know if you
>>> have
>>> > any questions.
>>> >
>>> > __ __
>>> >
>>> > Jonathan
>>> >
>>> > __ __
>>> >
>>> > Jonathan Zuck
>>> >
>>> > Chair, ALAC
>>> >
>>> > __ __
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > ECAdmin mailing list -- ecadmin at icann.org <mailto:ecadmin at icann.org>
>>> > To unsubscribe send an email to ecadmin-leave at icann.org <mailto:
>>> ecadmin-
>>> > leave at icann.org>
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
>>> your
>>> > personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
>>> > accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (
>>> https://www.icann.org/privacy/
>>> > policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms
>>> of
>>> > Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/
>>> > privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your
>>> > membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting
>>> > digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a
>>> > vacation), and so on.
>>>
>>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------


*Seun Ojedeji,*

Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250623/08062ad4/attachment.htm>