[Ncsg-discuss] REQUEST Review of Reviews - Seek views on composition

[Rafik Dammak]

hi all,

We have a request for input from the Review of Reviews Cross Community
Group regarding the composition of the review teams. The topic of
representation is something we raised concerns about previously.
Please let me know your thoughts.

Best,

Rafik


---------- Forwarded message ---------

Hi all,

Members of the Review of Reviews CCG have been asked to solicit input from
our SO/ACs on their preferred composition of the Accountability and
Transparency and On-Demand Reviews in the future program of reviews.

As set out in the below email from the CCG Chairs, the CCG would like to
understand if there is a clear or strong preference for either up to 3
representatives from each SO/AC or up to 2 representatives from each SO/AC,
or if there are no strong feelings.

Please share this with your groups and provide any feedback to me and/or
Osvaldo by 11 September. I will share this to SG/C lists where I can, but I
would appreciate you sharing where I do not have access.

As always, I am available to speak with your groups about the work of the
CCG and please feel free to reach out.

Thanks,
Sophie

Sophie Hey
she/her
Senior Policy Advisor
Com Laude

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



*Sent on behalf of Reviews CCG Co-Chairs*



Dear Reviews CCG Members,



As discussed on call #45, we would like to ask you to liaise with your
respective SO/ACs to take a sounding on their preferred approach to the
composition of review teams conducting Accountability and Transparency
Reviews and On-Demand Reviews.



Specifically, we would need views on whether each SO/AC should be able to
appoint:

   - Up to two representatives, consistent with the current model for
the Review
   of Reviews cross community group; or
   - Up to three representatives, as suggested in our first draft Report.



The large size of review teams was raised as a concern by some in the
public comment. Before further refining this aspect of the proposal, we
would therefore like to better understand the preferences of the respective
SO/ACs and whether there is a clear preference for either approach.



We would be grateful if you could take this question back to your
respective groups and report back to the CCG, if possible by the end of
next week.



Many thanks for your help in gathering this input.



Best regards



Avri, Chris and Manal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20260904/c66ba41a/attachment.htm>