[PC-NCSG] CCWG-Accountability

Sun Nov 23 05:48:46 EET 2014

PS: For member of the PC only

ie.

6 council members
2 NCUC reps
2 NPOC reps
1 NCSG Chair

Note: I set it up so that only I see the votes as the vote is going on,
so that people would not be influenced by the votes of others. 

I already put my vote in.

At the end, if the NCSG-PC agrees I can
-publish the vote
-or keep it secret
-or just give the NCSG chair the full results to deal with.

I made the secret ballot decision myself so as not to spend another few
days discussing the issue before the vote, figuring I could always
reveal later if desired.

avri

On 23-Nov-14 07:36, Avri Doria wrote:
> Ok.
>
> Poll is setup
>
> http://doodle.com/6ys85r6pd9z97ndx
>
> Open until 25 Nov UTC
>
> avri
>
>
>
> On 23-Nov-14 05:20, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi Avri,
>>
>> the window for any objections was fairly open for days. I do think we can
>> move to voting.
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2014-11-23 4:25 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>:
>>
>>>  Hi
>>>
>>> I have been waiting, hoping to hear at least one of the NPOC voices before
>>> proceeding.
>>>
>>> If you disagree, please say so, but the silent treatment?
>>>
>>> Anyone?
>>>
>>> We seem to have agreement on the NCUC side of the SG to move ahead with a
>>> vote between the candidates.  And no new candidates have surfaced.
>>>
>>> Now the ccNSO has approved the charter.  Any chance we can become
>>> functional on this?
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18-Nov-14 10:41, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The charter has passed the GNSO and is working its way through the other
>>> ACSO.
>>>
>>> We need to select someone to be the NCSG Member of the group
>>> (remembering that as many of us can participate as want, only one is a
>>> member whose special role only comes up in the event of determining
>>> whether there is rough consensus or  a vote in a case where there isn't
>>> an obvious consensus)
>>> As we learned on the CCWG-Stewardship, may be the supported traveler for
>>> a f2f meeting, if any f2f meeting is arranged.
>>>
>>> I think that 2 people have volunteered.  Robin & Joy.
>>> I think both are qualified as long as they are committed to the time it
>>> takes.
>>> (note: the deluge of work for the CSG-Stewardship took even me by surprise)
>>>
>>> I think that for the last week we have had no new volunteers.
>>>
>>> I think that it is time for us to make a selection.
>>>
>>> Does anyone object to setting up a simple doodle poll to select which of
>>> them is the member?
>>> I would suggest that the other be a designated backup for the member
>>> ready to jump in, in the case that the member can't travel or can't, for
>>> any other reason, complete the task.
>>>
>>> Any support for this course of action? And objections?
>>> I will probably wait a day or so before doing anything while waiting for
>>> objection from anyone on the PC.
>>>
>>> (As always if the alt-chair wants to assert his authority over any
>>> actions I am taking, I will set my plans aside. I am just trying to fill
>>> a gap here and make sure we are ready in time.)
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject:     [council] GNSO Council resolution 13 November 2014
>>> Date:     Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:06:37 +0000
>>> From:     Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org> <Glen at icann.org>
>>> To:     Council GNSO <council at gnso.icann.org> <council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Councillors,
>>>
>>> Ahead of the official Council minutes, the following resolution was
>>> passed at the GNSO Council meeting on 13 November 2014.
>>>
>>> Adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing
>>> ICANN Accountability
>>>
>>> Whereas,
>>>
>>> 1. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
>>> has requested that ICANN "convene a multistakeholder process to develop
>>> a plan to transition
>>>  the U.S. government stewardship role" with regard to the IANA Functions
>>> and related root zone management.
>>>
>>> 2. During discussions around the transition process, the community
>>> raised the broader topic of the impact of the change on ICANN's
>>> accountability given its historical
>>> contractual relationship with the United States and NTIA. Accountability
>>> in this context is defined, according to the Netmundial multistakeholder
>>> statement[1], as the
>>> existence of mechanisms for independent checks and balances as well as
>>> for review and redress.
>>>
>>> 3. The concerns raised during these discussions around the transition
>>> process indicate that the level of trust into the existing ICANN
>>> accountability mechanisms does
>>> not yet meet some stakeholder's expectations. Considering that the NTIA
>>> has stressed that it was expecting community consensus regarding the
>>> transition, this gap
>>> between the current situation and stakeholder expectations may prevent
>>> the transition to proceed.
>>>
>>> 4. A DT was formed with participants, amongst others, from the ccNSO,
>>> GNSO, ASO and ALAC to develop a charter for a Cross Community Working
>>> Group on
>>> Enhancing ICANN Accountability.
>>>
>>> 5. The DT delivered the proposed charter for consideration to all the
>>> ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees for consideration
>>> (see:http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en.pdf)
>>>
>>> Resolved,
>>>
>>> 1. The GNSO Council approves the Charter
>>> (http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en.pdf)
>>> and appoints Thomas Rickert as the GNSO Council liaison and GNSO
>>> co-chair to the CWG.
>>>
>>> 2. Each GNSO Stakeholder Group will identify one member for the CWG by
>>> 20 November taking into account the charter requirement that best
>>> efforts should be
>>> made to ensure that members:
>>>
>>> ?        Have sufficient expertise to participate in the applicable
>>> subject matter
>>>        (see for examplehttps://www.icann.org/resources/pages/enhancing-accountability-faqs-2014-08-22-en#12
>>> for areas identified for expertise);
>>>
>>> ?        Commit to actively participate in the activities of the CWG on
>>> an ongoing and long-term basis; and
>>>
>>> ?        Where appropriate, solicit and communicate the views and
>>> concerns of individuals in the organization that appoints them.
>>>
>>> 3. The GNSO will collaborate with the other SOs and ACs to issue a call
>>> for participants to join the CWG, each in accordance with its own rules.
>>>
>>> [1]http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder-Document.pdf
>>> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>> Thank you.
>>> Kind regards.
>>> Glen
>>>
>>> Glen de Saint G?ry
>>> GNSO Secretariatgnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.orghttp://gnso.icann.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing listPC-NCSG at ipjustice.orghttp://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20141123/389fc831/attachment.html>