[EC-NCSG] Fwd: FW: Status Update of GNSO Review
Rafik Dammak
rafik.dammak
Mon Dec 22 15:15:55 EET 2014
Hi everyone,
some updates from the GNSO review working party.
Rafik
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org>
Date: 2014-12-16 1:44 GMT+09:00
Subject: FW: Status Update of GNSO Review
To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
Cc: Maryam Bakoshi <maryam.bakoshi at icann.org>, Glen de Saint G?ry <
gnso-secretariat at gnso.icann.org>, "Jen Wolfe (jwolfe at wolfedomain.com)" <
jwolfe at wolfedomain.com>
*O**n behalf of:* Jen Wolfe
*Sent:* lundi 15 d?cembre 2014 17:17
Dear GNSO Council and GNSO leadership,
I hope everyone is having a great holiday season! I?d like to update you
on the progress of the review and provide you with the revised schedule.
Westlake team will deliver the Working Text and staff will organize the
wiki space to capture the feedback and views from the GNSO Review Working
Party on *2 January 2015*. The GNSO Review Working Party will have until *30
January* to provide consolidated comments on the Working Text back to
Westlake. This will ensure sufficient time to review the Working Text,
without interfering with everyone?s holiday. Two special meetings of the
GNSO Review Working Party will be scheduled in January. It will be very
important to have full participation from the Working Party, representing
the various stakeholder and constituency groups, to actively participate in
providing feedback. Once Westlake has received feedback from the Working
Party, they will prepare the draft report to be released.
Providing comments on the Working Text allows the GNSO Review Working Party
to offer feedback before it is publicly released and ensure any real or
perceived inaccuracies are addressed, as well as begin to capture issues
for further discussion as the Review process moves forward. Westlake will
then draft their report which will be posted for Public Comment at the end
of February, for the GNSO as a whole, along with the rest of the ICANN
community to provide feedback.
Please see the schedule below for further details. Key dates are also
available on the GNSO Review wiki <https://community.icann.org/x/OJLhAg>.
For your reference, I am forwarding an email from Richard Westlake, which
provides a brief overview of the status of the 360 Assessment survey,
interviews conducted and overall review methodology.
If you have any questions or would like clarification on any issue related
to the Review, please don?t hesitate to reach out to me directly and I will
be happy to respond as quickly as possible to ensure any concerns are
addressed prior to the release of the report. I am happy to be available
during upcoming Council meetings to answer questions and will look forward
to a more detailed briefing with Council in Singapore.
Wishing you all a joyous holiday season and New Year!
Jen
*GNSO Review: Important Dates*
Working text for the GNSO Review Working Party and Staff for clarification
and comments (distributed and posted on the wiki)
2 January 2015
GNSO Review Working Party working session #1 ? Westlake Briefing
16 January 201518:00 UTC
GNSO Review Working Party working session #2 ? discussion, Q&A
22 January 18:00 UTC
Consolidated comments on Working Text due to Westlake from GNSO Review
Working Party and Staff
30 January
Updates and discussions during ICANN52
8-12 February; public session date TBD
Draft Report delivered by Westlake
20 February
Draft Report posted for public comment
27 February
Public Comment period (42 days)
27 February ? 10 April
Final Report
30 April (tentative, depending on volume and nature of public comments)
*Update from Richard Westlake*
Dear Jen and Larisa,
Following recent questions about Westlake?s review methods and individual
interviews, I should like to highlight some points to reiterate why we
consider that we have collected extensive, diverse, balanced and
fact-based sets of data. We have and will continue to apply our
professional expertise and independent perspective to ensure a high-quality
useful final report, and we note that many of our observations and
recommendations will be a matter of informed subject judgment in addition
to, and based largely on, our research findings.
1. The GNSO Review Methodology formulated by the Structural
Improvement Committee and used as the basis for the Request for Proposal,
Westlake's response, and the Terms of Reference/Scope of Work consisted of
three data collection mechanisms:
a. 360 Assessment designed to collect feedback from GNSO, other
SOs/ACs, Board and Staff (quantitative and qualitative) ? our primary and
critical component. In addition (and outside the scope originally
envisaged), following feedback and advice, we added the Supplementary
Working Group 360 Assessment, to provide a greater depth of information on
the WGs;
b. Review of documents and records;
c. Limited interviews to fill in the gaps.
(As you know, the GNSO Review Working Party has provided substantive
feedback and guidance on the review methodology, including extensive input
into the formulation of the 360 Assessment and Supplementary WG 360.)
2. We and ICANN staff carried out extensive outreach and engagement
efforts between July and October, to encourage participation in the 360
Assessment, including two extensions to allow ample time for people to
respond ? see chart below. These efforts resulted in 178 completed
responses from a broad and diverse group of people by the time the 360
closed at the end of ICANN51.
3. From the start, Westlake advocated for the interview component to
be given more weight (both in our original response to the RfP
and subsequently). This led to a modification in the original plans to
enable our team to attend ICANN51, where we spoke to many people and
attended many of the SG/C meetings, providing us with a first-hand view of
GNSO proceedings. We contacted an extensive list of relevant people -
including some, but not all, SG/C chairs - before the LA meeting.
We successfully conducted interviews, in person and subsequently over the
phone, with about 27 individuals to date and likely to total about 30.
Several people we contacted failed even to respond, despite several
attempts and others have been unable to make time to speak to us.
Since LA, we have again tried to contact several people with only limited
response. Although we are at a very late stage, we still aim to speak to a
few more people.
4. Our team has reviewed extensive documents relating to the
implementation of earlier review recommendations, along with other
documentation, and has analysed records detailing the work of the GNSO.
5. The data our team has gathered from these channels has been
extensive and in our view sufficiently broad and diverse to support our
observations, leading to findings and recommendations that we shall include
in our Draft Report. As a further opportunity for feedback, before we
finalise our report, there will be additional opportunities for the GNSO
and others to offer their views:
a. The GNSO Review Working Party will review our Working Text and
engage in a dialogue to clarify, expand and correct information, as
appropriate. We will be particularly interested in this group?s feedback
on the usefulness and practicality of our draft recommendations.
b. An overview will be presented in a session at ICANN52 in February,
with another opportunity to provide feedback.
c. The formal Public Comment Period will open in February and the
feedback will be considered as we prepare our Final Report.
d. We will continue to work closely with the GNSO Review Working Party
through the balance of the Review.
I trust that this information covers your questions about our methodology
and any remaining concerns about our interviews.
Please contact me again if you need any additional information.
Have a good weekend!
Kind regards
Richard
Richard G A Westlake
*Westlake Governance*
*GNSO Review Statistics*
*360 Assessment:*
-- Main survey
152 completed responses
(250 started)
-- Supplementary survey (WG)
26 completed responses
(50 started)
*Total*
*178 completed responses*
*60% completion rate*
*Interviews:*
*27 to date, likely total 30+*
*(Plus several other shorter informal discussions, mainly in LA)*
*GNSO Review Working Party meetings:*
*13*
*Engagement:*
-- Announcements page views
*1,709*
-- Blog page views
*2,957*
*Outreach:*
-- Webinars
*3*
-- Update presentations
*14*
-- Blogs
*2*
-- Videos
*2*
-- FAQ Brochures and Post cards distributed at ICANN51
*3,000*
*jennifer c. WOLFE, esq., apr, SSBB*
Founder & President, wolfe domain, a digital brand strategy advisory firm
*513.746.2801*
*IAM 300 - TOp 300 global ip strategists 2011-2014*
What will you do with your Dot Brand? : http://ow.ly/Ebl8P
Subscribe to Our You Tube Channel on Brand gTLDs http://ow.ly/Eblgc
Jen Wolfe gTLD Click Z Column http://ow.ly/EbljP
Linked In Group: gTLD Strategy for Brands http://ow.ly/EbloM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/attachments/20141222/2a5c2c59/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the NCSG-EC
mailing list