From ncsg  Mon May  2 10:42:41 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 10:42:41 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Call for candidates - GNSO Liaison to the GAC
Message-ID: <20160502074241.GE22953@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

Dear all,

Most of you are probably already aware of this.

We have several people who'd be qualified for the position
and with luck some of them would be willing, too.

Tentatively I would suggest issuing a call for nominations/volunteers
to ncsg-discuss soon with deadline well before May 24 (when the
application must be submitted to the secretariat) and having the PC
decide which one(s) to submit.

Comments welcome.

Tapani

----- Forwarded message from Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org> -----

Dear All,

As you may be aware, the GNSO Council decided during its last meeting to institute the GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) as a permanent role following a successful pilot. As the current GNSO liaison to the GAC has indicated that he is not available to continue in this role, a call for volunteers is hereby launched to identify new candidates. You will find further details in the attached document concerning the required skills and expertise, as well as the selection process which follows in broad lines the process that was used as part of the pilot project. In relation to nominating candidates, please note that the leadership of each Stakeholder Group / Constituency may submit the application of its candidate(s), which should include at a minimum a link to a completed and current statement of interest as well as a brief note explaining why the candidate has applied for this role and how the candidate meets the specific requirements by 24 May 2016 at the latest to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org>).

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to the GNSO Secretariat at <gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org>>

Best regards,

GNSO Secretariat



REQUEST FOR CANDIDATES ? GNSO LIAISON TO THE GAC
Candidates are invited for Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO)
Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)

Background
As part of the discussions within ICANN between the GNSO and GAC, on how  to
facilitate  early  engagement  of  the  GAC  in  GNSO   policy   development
activities, the option of appointing a GNSO liaison  to  the  GAC  has  been
proposed as one  of  the  mechanisms  to  explore.  As  such,  the  GAC-GNSO
Consultation Group (CG) on GAC Early Engagement in GNSO  policy  development
activities implemented a two-year pilot program in FY15-16 (starting 1  July
2014 to 30 June  2016).  This  mechanism  was  evaluated  by  the  CG  which
recommended in March 2016 to the GAC and GNSO to transform this  pilot  into
a permanent role.

Objective
The GNSO liaison to the GAC (hereafter  ?the  Liaison?)  will  be  primarily
responsible  for  providing  timely  updates  to  the  GAC  on  GNSO  policy
development activities in order  to  complement  the  existing  notification
processes  as  well  answering  questions  in  relation  to   these   (GNSO)
activities that GAC members may  have.  Furthermore,  the  Liaison  will  be
responsible  for  providing  the  GNSO  Council  with  regular  updates   on
progress, including on GAC activities,  specifically  in  so  far  as  these
relate to issues of interest to the  GNSO.  The  objective  of  the  liaison
mechanism, in combination with some of the other mechanisms that the  CG  is
exploring,  as  well  as  existing  early  engagement  tools,  will  be   to
facilitate effective early engagement  of  the  GAC  as  well  as  generally
assist with flow of information between the GAC and the  GNSO.  In  addition
to these existing engagement tools, regular co-ordination calls  are  to  be
scheduled between the GNSO Liaison to the GAC and  the  GAC  Secretariat  to
ascertain that all the relevant information has been  received  by  the  GAC
and progress is being made, following  which  a  regular  status  update  is
provided by the Liaison to the GNSO Council.

Skills and Experience
 ? Significant experience in and knowledge of the  GNSO  policy  development
   process as well as of recent and current policy work under discussion and
   / or review in the GNSO
 ? Availability to travel to and participate  in  GAC  meetings  during  the
   course of ICANN  meetings  and  also,  where  applicable,  intercessional
   meetings (via teleconference)
 ? A former or recently departed  GNSO  Councilor  is  likely  to  be  well-
   qualified for the position but this is not a necessary criterion for  the
   Liaison.

Responsibilities
 ? Attend and participate as required in GAC meetings during ICANN  meetings
   and possible intercessional meetings (Note: travel funding  is  available
   for the ICANN meetings should the Liaison otherwise not be able to attend
   an ICANN meeting)
 ? Represent and communicate the policy work of the GNSO in  a  neutral  and
   objective manner
 ? Liaise with ICANN  policy  staff  who  may  assist,  as  needed,  in  the
   preparation of briefing materials and/or responses to questions
 ? Liaise with relevant working  groups,  utilizing  GNSO  Council  liaisons
   where required, in order to be continuously current and knowledgeable  on
   work in progress
 ? Provide regular updates to the GNSO Council
 ? Guide the GAC in opportunities for early engagement
 ? Keep the GAC updated on how its early input was considered by the GNSO
 ? Assist in the facilitation of GAC-GNSO discussions  in  cases  where  GAC
   early input is in conflict with GNSO views

Practical Working
 ? Attend all GAC open meetings and be allowed to request the floor
 ? Attend GAC closed meetings discussing GNSO related topics and be  allowed
   to request the floor
 ? Attend GAC conference calls by invitation and accordingly be  allowed  to
   request the floor
 ? Join GAC working groups by  invitation  and  accordingly  be  allowed  to
   request the floor
 ? Will not be on the GAC mailing list but may send  to  it  t  through  the
   mailing list admin and receives replies by being cc?d

Application Process
1. The leadership of each Stakeholder Group / Constituency may submit the
   application of its candidate(s), which should include at a minimum a link
   to a completed and current statement of interest as well as a brief note
   explaining why the candidate has applied for this role and how the
   candidate meets the specific requirements by 24 May 2016 at the latest to
   the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org).
2. The GNSO Council Chairs will review the applications received and rank
   these taking into account the skills and experience required as outlined
   in this call for volunteers by 7 June 2016.
3. Based on the outcome of the ranking process, the GNSO Council Chairs
   will contact the nr 1 candidate to confirm the selection by 12 June 2016.
4. GNSO Council Chairs will submit motion for confirmation of GNSO Liaison
   to the GAC to the GNSO Council by 17 June 2016 at the latest.
5. Consideration of motion and approval of candidate by GNSO Council during
   GNSO Council meeting on 30 June 2016.
6. Confirmation of candidate to GAC leadership (by 1 July 2016).
7. GNSO Liaison to the GAC officially takes up its role (by 1 July 2016).

Removal
In the case of significant issues identified with  the  performance  of  the
liaison,  the  GNSO  Council  Leadership,  in  consultation  with  the   GAC
Leadership, may decide to remove (and possibly replace) the Liaison  at  any
point during the Liaison?s term.

Review and Renewal
The role is reviewed and the liaison is reconfirmed by the GNSO  Council  in
its position every year, unless the Liaison has indicated that he/she is  no
longer available to continue in this role in  which  case  a  new  selection
process as outlined above will take place. As part of this review, the  GNSO
Council is expected to request the GAC and/or GAC Secretariat for  input  on
the role and functioning of the GNSO Liaison to the GAC.

----- End forwarded message -----



From maryam.bakoshi  Wed May  4 14:24:30 2016
From: maryam.bakoshi (Maryam Bakoshi)
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 11:24:30 +0000
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Doodle Poll - NCSG Open Policy Meeting
Message-ID: <B0C3BB5A-8552-4B36-9BA2-D63145554A0F@icann.org>

Dear all,

In order to determine time for the NCSG Monthly Open Policy Meeting, on Tuesday 10th May, in preparation for the GNSO Council meeting of 12 May 2016, please complete the doodle poll below:

http://doodle.com/poll/s937g6ewy3qcr3ud

This doodle will close tomorrow 05 May 2016 at 2359 UTC.

Thank you for your time.

Many thanks,
--
Maryam Bakoshi
Secretariat ?Support - NCSG, NCUC, NPOC
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Email:  maryam.bakoshi at icann.org<mailto:maryam.bakoshi at icann.org>
Mobile:  +44 7737 698036
Skype:  maryam.bakoshi.icann
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160504/11d9be1e/attachment.html>


From maryam.bakoshi  Thu May  5 10:47:59 2016
From: maryam.bakoshi (Maryam Bakoshi)
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 07:47:59 +0000
Subject: [PC-NCSG] REMINDER: Doodle Poll - NCSG Open Policy Meeting
Message-ID: <D350B920.1EC1C%maryam.bakoshi@icann.org>

Dear all,

In order to determine time for the NCSG Monthly Open Policy Meeting, on Tuesday 10th May, in preparation for the GNSO Council meeting of 12 May 2016, please complete the doodle poll below:

http://doodle.com/poll/s937g6ewy3qcr3ud

This doodle will close TODAY 05 May 2016 at 2359 UTC.

Thank you for your time.

Many thanks,
--
Maryam Bakoshi
Secretariat ?Support - NCSG, NCUC, NPOC
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Email:  maryam.bakoshi at icann.org<mailto:maryam.bakoshi at icann.org>
Mobile:  +44 7737 698036
Skype:  maryam.bakoshi.icann
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160505/77915976/attachment.html>


From ncsg  Mon May  9 12:47:41 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 12:47:41 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
Message-ID: <20160509094741.GB30611@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

Hi all,

Given that Helsinki is supposed to be policy-centred meeting,
I think I'll drop this to the Policy Committee.

What kind of meetings do we want?

Note deadline in just over a week.

If desired we can also discuss this in tomorrow's policy call.

Tapani

----- Forwarded message from Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org> -----

Dear Tapani,
Would you please provide the following information for your Stakeholder Group/Constituency meeting requests for the Helsinki Policy Forum. Please let me have these no later than 18 May 2016.
Attached please find the GNSO Draft schedule for Policy meetings in Helsinki and the ICANN56 Block Schedule <https://community.icann.org/display/ccmeetschedplan/Meeting+Schedule+Planning> Planning.  We hope that these two schedules will help you find suitable non conflicting slots for any other Policy related meetings your groups may like to schedule during the week.
Since the Policy Forum meeting will only be four days long and different from other typical meetings that have been held there will be a certain restriction of meeting space. However there will be restricted space available each day for some GNSO related meetings from 08:00-18:30 with full AV facilities.
Bi-lateral meetings with the GNSO Council as well as Stakeholder Group/Constituency meeting requests will be sent to the GNSO Council chair and vice chairs for their consideration before they are published on the schedule.

Please note that private meetings held over the lunch break should fall in with the lunch break time slots which are 12:00-13:30.
Please provide a Session Title, and Overview for each meeting
Who Should Attend?

All publicly posted sessions MUST have a description. What is the session about? Who is the audience? Speakers?
* a breakdown of topics to be discussed
* a list of speakers/panellists split up according to relevant subject
* an explanation of the session's goals and expected outcomes
* hyperlinks to relevant documentation.

The objective is to ensure that community leaders and participants, especially remote participants, are able to evaluate whether or not this is a session they wish to attend, so the more information you can give about it the better.

?        Preferred  Day/Time - please state
Avoid overlapping regularly scheduled breaks (see below).

?        Estimated Number of Attendees

?        Remote Participation
Will you have remote presenters

?        Audio Visual Requirements
                        Please note any special requests with regard to:
Adobe connect, - name of person who could run Adobe Connect
audio streaming,
recording,
transcription,
teleconferencing,
Presentation lap top,
Audio connection to the presentation laptop (video to show, etc).

 Please note: Kindly inform the Technical Staff in the room when you will be breaking for morning/afternoon coffee breaks and lunch breaks so that they are there to restart the audio streaming, the recordings and the phone lines.

Helsinki Schedule - time blocks
08:00-09:00    60 min (Welcome on Monday Only)
09:15-10:30    75 min
10:30-10:45    15 min COFFEE BREAK
10:45-12:00    75 min
12:00-13:30    90 min LUNCH BREAK
13:30-14:45    75 min
14:45-15:15    30 min COFFEE BREAK
15:15-16:45    90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
17:00-18:30    90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS

Given that this is the first time we are experimenting with the meeting B format, it is still unclear what room availability there will be so please be patient & understanding, we will do our best to accommodate your meetings.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you so much.
Kind regards.

Glen

Glen de Saint G?ry
GNSO Secretariat

----- End forwarded message -----




From rafik.dammak  Mon May  9 13:28:23 2016
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 19:28:23 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160509094741.GB30611@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
References: <20160509094741.GB30611@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThk6ANz3p5dxFg3TG-ZcgKeRyWHJUQYpmPKvdFhjKVGHfg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tapani,

thanks for the note
yes it makes sense to see if NCSG PC wants some internal meetings:
- all slots are filled with GNSO council meetings, PDP WGs' meetings and
cross-community sessions
- it is not clear if we can have an internal session in parallel with those
meetings.
- it seems that SG/C will organize internal sessions during lunch time
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg18578.html.
- there is fewer chance to have the breakfast slot

I think we have to see what we would like to achieve by those internal
sessions, having in mind that the schedule as it is now, is quite crammed.
do we want to use them as preparatory session like for WGs discussion,for
cross-community topics, for wrap-up, briefing or preparing for GNSO council
meeting?

Best,

Rafik

2016-05-09 18:47 GMT+09:00 Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>:

> Hi all,
>
> Given that Helsinki is supposed to be policy-centred meeting,
> I think I'll drop this to the Policy Committee.
>
> What kind of meetings do we want?
>
> Note deadline in just over a week.
>
> If desired we can also discuss this in tomorrow's policy call.
>
> Tapani
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org> -----
>
> Dear Tapani,
> Would you please provide the following information for your Stakeholder
> Group/Constituency meeting requests for the Helsinki Policy Forum. Please
> let me have these no later than 18 May 2016.
> Attached please find the GNSO Draft schedule for Policy meetings in
> Helsinki and the ICANN56 Block Schedule <
> https://community.icann.org/display/ccmeetschedplan/Meeting+Schedule+Planning>
> Planning.  We hope that these two schedules will help you find suitable non
> conflicting slots for any other Policy related meetings your groups may
> like to schedule during the week.
> Since the Policy Forum meeting will only be four days long and different
> from other typical meetings that have been held there will be a certain
> restriction of meeting space. However there will be restricted space
> available each day for some GNSO related meetings from 08:00-18:30 with
> full AV facilities.
> Bi-lateral meetings with the GNSO Council as well as Stakeholder
> Group/Constituency meeting requests will be sent to the GNSO Council chair
> and vice chairs for their consideration before they are published on the
> schedule.
>
> Please note that private meetings held over the lunch break should fall in
> with the lunch break time slots which are 12:00-13:30.
> Please provide a Session Title, and Overview for each meeting
> Who Should Attend?
>
> All publicly posted sessions MUST have a description. What is the session
> about? Who is the audience? Speakers?
> * a breakdown of topics to be discussed
> * a list of speakers/panellists split up according to relevant subject
> * an explanation of the session's goals and expected outcomes
> * hyperlinks to relevant documentation.
>
> The objective is to ensure that community leaders and participants,
> especially remote participants, are able to evaluate whether or not this is
> a session they wish to attend, so the more information you can give about
> it the better.
>
> ?        Preferred  Day/Time - please state
> Avoid overlapping regularly scheduled breaks (see below).
>
> ?        Estimated Number of Attendees
>
> ?        Remote Participation
> Will you have remote presenters
>
> ?        Audio Visual Requirements
>                         Please note any special requests with regard to:
> Adobe connect, - name of person who could run Adobe Connect
> audio streaming,
> recording,
> transcription,
> teleconferencing,
> Presentation lap top,
> Audio connection to the presentation laptop (video to show, etc).
>
>  Please note: Kindly inform the Technical Staff in the room when you will
> be breaking for morning/afternoon coffee breaks and lunch breaks so that
> they are there to restart the audio streaming, the recordings and the phone
> lines.
>
> Helsinki Schedule - time blocks
> 08:00-09:00    60 min (Welcome on Monday Only)
> 09:15-10:30    75 min
> 10:30-10:45    15 min COFFEE BREAK
> 10:45-12:00    75 min
> 12:00-13:30    90 min LUNCH BREAK
> 13:30-14:45    75 min
> 14:45-15:15    30 min COFFEE BREAK
> 15:15-16:45    90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
> 17:00-18:30    90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>
> Given that this is the first time we are experimenting with the meeting B
> format, it is still unclear what room availability there will be so please
> be patient & understanding, we will do our best to accommodate your
> meetings.
> Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
> Thank you so much.
> Kind regards.
>
> Glen
>
> Glen de Saint G?ry
> GNSO Secretariat
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160509/26a6ce87/attachment.html>


From mshears  Thu May 12 15:45:47 2016
From: mshears (Matthew Shears)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 13:45:47 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThk6ANz3p5dxFg3TG-ZcgKeRyWHJUQYpmPKvdFhjKVGHfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160509094741.GB30611@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<CAH5sThk6ANz3p5dxFg3TG-ZcgKeRyWHJUQYpmPKvdFhjKVGHfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57347AFB.3040401@cdt.org>

At a minimum I think we should have a PC meeting in which we discuss the 
key issues/WGs, how we populate them, what are the priorities, etc.

Matthew

On 5/9/2016 11:28 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi Tapani,
>
> thanks for the note
> yes it makes sense to see if NCSG PC wants some internal meetings:
> - all slots are filled with GNSO council meetings, PDP WGs' meetings 
> and cross-community sessions
> - it is not clear if we can have an internal session in parallel with 
> those meetings.
> - it seems that SG/C will organize internal sessions during lunch time 
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg18578.html.
> - there is fewer chance to have the breakfast slot
>
> I think we have to see what we would like to achieve by those internal 
> sessions, having in mind that the schedule as it is now, is quite 
> crammed. do we want to use them as preparatory session like for WGs 
> discussion,for cross-community topics, for wrap-up, briefing or 
> preparing for GNSO council meeting?
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2016-05-09 18:47 GMT+09:00 Tapani Tarvainen 
> <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info <mailto:ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>>:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     Given that Helsinki is supposed to be policy-centred meeting,
>     I think I'll drop this to the Policy Committee.
>
>     What kind of meetings do we want?
>
>     Note deadline in just over a week.
>
>     If desired we can also discuss this in tomorrow's policy call.
>
>     Tapani
>
>     ----- Forwarded message from Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org
>     <mailto:Glen at icann.org>> -----
>
>     Dear Tapani,
>     Would you please provide the following information for your
>     Stakeholder Group/Constituency meeting requests for the Helsinki
>     Policy Forum. Please let me have these no later than 18 May 2016.
>     Attached please find the GNSO Draft schedule for Policy meetings
>     in Helsinki and the ICANN56 Block Schedule
>     <https://community.icann.org/display/ccmeetschedplan/Meeting+Schedule+Planning>
>     Planning.  We hope that these two schedules will help you find
>     suitable non conflicting slots for any other Policy related
>     meetings your groups may like to schedule during the week.
>     Since the Policy Forum meeting will only be four days long and
>     different from other typical meetings that have been held there
>     will be a certain restriction of meeting space. However there will
>     be restricted space available each day for some GNSO related
>     meetings from 08:00-18:30 with full AV facilities.
>     Bi-lateral meetings with the GNSO Council as well as Stakeholder
>     Group/Constituency meeting requests will be sent to the GNSO
>     Council chair and vice chairs for their consideration before they
>     are published on the schedule.
>
>     Please note that private meetings held over the lunch break should
>     fall in with the lunch break time slots which are 12:00-13:30.
>     Please provide a Session Title, and Overview for each meeting
>     Who Should Attend?
>
>     All publicly posted sessions MUST have a description. What is the
>     session about? Who is the audience? Speakers?
>     * a breakdown of topics to be discussed
>     * a list of speakers/panellists split up according to relevant subject
>     * an explanation of the session's goals and expected outcomes
>     * hyperlinks to relevant documentation.
>
>     The objective is to ensure that community leaders and
>     participants, especially remote participants, are able to evaluate
>     whether or not this is a session they wish to attend, so the more
>     information you can give about it the better.
>
>     ?        Preferred  Day/Time - please state
>     Avoid overlapping regularly scheduled breaks (see below).
>
>     ?        Estimated Number of Attendees
>
>     ?        Remote Participation
>     Will you have remote presenters
>
>     ?        Audio Visual Requirements
>                             Please note any special requests with
>     regard to:
>     Adobe connect, - name of person who could run Adobe Connect
>     audio streaming,
>     recording,
>     transcription,
>     teleconferencing,
>     Presentation lap top,
>     Audio connection to the presentation laptop (video to show, etc).
>
>      Please note: Kindly inform the Technical Staff in the room when
>     you will be breaking for morning/afternoon coffee breaks and lunch
>     breaks so that they are there to restart the audio streaming, the
>     recordings and the phone lines.
>
>     Helsinki Schedule - time blocks
>     08:00-09:00    60 min (Welcome on Monday Only)
>     09:15-10:30    75 min
>     10:30-10:45    15 min COFFEE BREAK
>     10:45-12:00    75 min
>     12:00-13:30    90 min LUNCH BREAK
>     13:30-14:45    75 min
>     14:45-15:15    30 min COFFEE BREAK
>     15:15-16:45    90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>     17:00-18:30    90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>
>     Given that this is the first time we are experimenting with the
>     meeting B format, it is still unclear what room availability there
>     will be so please be patient & understanding, we will do our best
>     to accommodate your meetings.
>     Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
>     Thank you so much.
>     Kind regards.
>
>     Glen
>
>     Glen de Saint G?ry
>     GNSO Secretariat
>
>     ----- End forwarded message -----
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     PC-NCSG mailing list
>     PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto: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

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160512/27e9c423/attachment.html>


From egmorris1  Thu May 12 16:58:49 2016
From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 14:58:49 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <57347AFB.3040401@cdt.org>
References: <20160509094741.GB30611@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<CAH5sThk6ANz3p5dxFg3TG-ZcgKeRyWHJUQYpmPKvdFhjKVGHfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<57347AFB.3040401@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <B435D29D-7E87-4C79-8419-E595A138DFC0@toast.net>

A session focused on making the PC work better, as suggested by Matt in terms of specific items below, could be useful.

Marilia, Wendy, Avri, Amr ...some of our most experienced and talented volunteers have Chaired the PC since I have been here but it never seems to quite work. If we could focus on this specific problem and come out with some work arounds it could be a very valuable session.

Ed

Sent from my iPhone

> On 12 May 2016, at 13:46, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:
> 
> At a minimum I think we should have a PC meeting in which we discuss the key issues/WGs, how we populate them, what are the priorities, etc.
> 
> Matthew
> 
>> On 5/9/2016 11:28 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi Tapani,
>> 
>> thanks for the note
>> yes it makes sense to see if NCSG PC wants some internal meetings:
>> - all slots are filled with GNSO council meetings, PDP WGs' meetings and cross-community sessions
>> - it is not clear if we can have an internal session in parallel with those meetings.
>> - it seems that SG/C will organize internal sessions during lunch time http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg18578.html.
>> - there is fewer chance to have the breakfast slot
>> 
>> I think we have to see what we would like to achieve by those internal sessions, having in mind that the schedule as it is now, is quite crammed. do we want to use them as preparatory session like for WGs discussion,for cross-community topics, for wrap-up, briefing or preparing for GNSO council meeting?
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Rafik
>> 
>> 2016-05-09 18:47 GMT+09:00 Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Given that Helsinki is supposed to be policy-centred meeting,
>>> I think I'll drop this to the Policy Committee.
>>> 
>>> What kind of meetings do we want?
>>> 
>>> Note deadline in just over a week.
>>> 
>>> If desired we can also discuss this in tomorrow's policy call.
>>> 
>>> Tapani
>>> 
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Glen de Saint G??ry <Glen at icann.org> -----
>>> 
>>> Dear Tapani,
>>> Would you please provide the following information for your Stakeholder Group/Constituency meeting requests for the Helsinki Policy Forum. Please let me have these no later than 18 May 2016.
>>> Attached please find the GNSO Draft schedule for Policy meetings in Helsinki and the ICANN56 Block Schedule <https://community.icann.org/display/ccmeetschedplan/Meeting+Schedule+Planning> Planning.?  We hope that these two schedules will help you find suitable non conflicting slots for any other Policy related meetings your groups may like to schedule during               the week.
>>> Since the Policy Forum meeting will only be four days long and different from other typical meetings that have been held there will be a certain restriction of meeting space. However there will be restricted space available each day for some GNSO related meetings from 08:00-18:30 with full AV facilities.
>>> Bi-lateral meetings with the GNSO Council as well as Stakeholder Group/Constituency meeting requests will be sent to the GNSO Council chair and vice chairs for their consideration before they are published on the schedule.
>>> 
>>> Please note that private meetings held over the lunch break should fall in with the lunch break time slots which are 12:00-13:30.
>>> Please provide a Session Title, and Overview for each meeting
>>> Who Should Attend?
>>> 
>>> All publicly posted sessions MUST have a description. What is the session about? Who is the audience? Speakers?
>>> * a breakdown of topics to be discussed
>>> * a list of speakers/panellists split up according to relevant subject
>>> * an explanation of the session's goals and expected outcomes
>>> * hyperlinks to relevant documentation.
>>> 
>>> The objective is to ensure that community leaders and participants, especially remote participants, are able to evaluate whether or not this is a session they wish to attend, so the more information you can give about it the better.
>>> 
>>> ???  ?  ?  ?  Preferred?  Day/Time - please state
>>> Avoid overlapping regularly scheduled breaks (see below).
>>> 
>>> ???  ?  ?  ?  Estimated Number of Attendees
>>> 
>>> ???  ?  ?  ?  Remote Participation
>>> Will you have remote presenters
>>> 
>>> ???  ?  ?  ?  Audio Visual Requirements
>>> ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  Please note any special requests with regard to:
>>> Adobe connect, - name of person who could run Adobe Connect
>>> audio streaming,
>>> recording,
>>> transcription,
>>> teleconferencing,
>>> Presentation lap top,
>>> Audio connection to the presentation laptop (video to show, etc).
>>> 
>>> ? Please note: Kindly inform the Technical Staff in the room when you will be breaking for morning/afternoon coffee breaks and lunch breaks so that they are there to restart the audio streaming, the recordings and the phone lines.
>>> 
>>> Helsinki Schedule - time blocks
>>> 08:00-09:00?  ?  60 min (Welcome on Monday Only)
>>> 09:15-10:30?  ?  75 min
>>> 10:30-10:45?  ?  15 min COFFEE BREAK
>>> 10:45-12:00?  ?  75 min
>>> 12:00-13:30?  ?  90 min LUNCH BREAK
>>> 13:30-14:45?  ?  75 min
>>> 14:45-15:15?  ?  30 min COFFEE BREAK
>>> 15:15-16:45?  ?  90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>>> 17:00-18:30?  ?  90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>>> 
>>> Given that this is the first time we are experimenting with the meeting B format, it is still unclear what room availability there will be so please be patient & understanding, we will do our best to accommodate your meetings.
>>> Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
>>> Thank you so much.
>>> Kind regards.
>>> 
>>> Glen
>>> 
>>> Glen de Saint G??ry
>>> GNSO Secretariat
>>> 
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> -- 
> 
> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
> Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
> E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160512/50e93772/attachment-0001.html>


From stephanie.perrin  Thu May 12 17:21:54 2016
From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 10:21:54 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <B435D29D-7E87-4C79-8419-E595A138DFC0@toast.net>
References: <20160509094741.GB30611@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<CAH5sThk6ANz3p5dxFg3TG-ZcgKeRyWHJUQYpmPKvdFhjKVGHfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<57347AFB.3040401@cdt.org>
	<B435D29D-7E87-4C79-8419-E595A138DFC0@toast.net>
Message-ID: <0ce27dfd-c8af-7a84-2d31-5ac36e146670@mail.utoronto.ca>

It is certainly important to figure out how to make the policy committee 
work better.  Personally, however, as indicated in the draft proposal 
sent to Tapani re this meeting request, I think we need to focus on our 
collective strategy regarding the many pdps we are staffing.  Can we not 
discuss policy committee issues on the list?  Seems a bit dry and 
frankly we need the chairs to discuss their collective frustrations and 
experiences first.   This time is precious, and those of us on PDPs want 
input from our colleagues so that we have a collective front. We also 
want to provide enough information to new folks to keep them motivated 
to attend and participate.

cheers Stephanie


On 2016-05-12 9:58, Edward Morris wrote:
> A session focused on making the PC work better, as suggested by Matt 
> in terms of specific items below, could be useful.
>
> Marilia, Wendy, Avri, Amr ...some of our most experienced and talented 
> volunteers have Chaired the PC since I have been here but it never 
> seems to quite work. If we could focus on this specific problem and 
> come out with some work arounds it could be a very valuable session.
>
> Ed
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 12 May 2016, at 13:46, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org 
> <mailto:mshears at cdt.org>> wrote:
>
>> At a minimum I think we should have a PC meeting in which we discuss 
>> the key issues/WGs, how we populate them, what are the priorities, etc.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>> On 5/9/2016 11:28 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>> Hi Tapani,
>>>
>>> thanks for the note
>>> yes it makes sense to see if NCSG PC wants some internal meetings:
>>> - all slots are filled with GNSO council meetings, PDP WGs' meetings 
>>> and cross-community sessions
>>> - it is not clear if we can have an internal session in parallel 
>>> with those meetings.
>>> - it seems that SG/C will organize internal sessions during lunch 
>>> time http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg18578.html.
>>> - there is fewer chance to have the breakfast slot
>>>
>>> I think we have to see what we would like to achieve by those 
>>> internal sessions, having in mind that the schedule as it is now, is 
>>> quite crammed. do we want to use them as preparatory session like 
>>> for WGs discussion,for cross-community topics, for wrap-up, briefing 
>>> or preparing for GNSO council meeting?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> 2016-05-09 18:47 GMT+09:00 Tapani Tarvainen 
>>> <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info <mailto:ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>>:
>>>
>>>     Hi all,
>>>
>>>     Given that Helsinki is supposed to be policy-centred meeting,
>>>     I think I'll drop this to the Policy Committee.
>>>
>>>     What kind of meetings do we want?
>>>
>>>     Note deadline in just over a week.
>>>
>>>     If desired we can also discuss this in tomorrow's policy call.
>>>
>>>     Tapani
>>>
>>>     ----- Forwarded message from Glen de Saint G??ry
>>>     <Glen at icann.org> -----
>>>
>>>     Dear Tapani,
>>>     Would you please provide the following information for your
>>>     Stakeholder Group/Constituency meeting requests for the Helsinki
>>>     Policy Forum. Please let me have these no later than 18 May 2016.
>>>     Attached please find the GNSO Draft schedule for Policy meetings
>>>     in Helsinki and the ICANN56 Block Schedule
>>>     <https://community.icann.org/display/ccmeetschedplan/Meeting+Schedule+Planning>
>>>     Planning.?  We hope that these two schedules will help you find
>>>     suitable non conflicting slots for any other Policy related
>>>     meetings your groups may like to schedule during the week.
>>>     Since the Policy Forum meeting will only be four days long and
>>>     different from other typical meetings that have been held there
>>>     will be a certain restriction of meeting space. However there
>>>     will be restricted space available each day for some GNSO
>>>     related meetings from 08:00-18:30 with full AV facilities.
>>>     Bi-lateral meetings with the GNSO Council as well as Stakeholder
>>>     Group/Constituency meeting requests will be sent to the GNSO
>>>     Council chair and vice chairs for their consideration before
>>>     they are published on the schedule.
>>>
>>>     Please note that private meetings held over the lunch break
>>>     should fall in with the lunch break time slots which are
>>>     12:00-13:30.
>>>     Please provide a Session Title, and Overview for each meeting
>>>     Who Should Attend?
>>>
>>>     All publicly posted sessions MUST have a description. What is
>>>     the session about? Who is the audience? Speakers?
>>>     * a breakdown of topics to be discussed
>>>     * a list of speakers/panellists split up according to relevant
>>>     subject
>>>     * an explanation of the session's goals and expected outcomes
>>>     * hyperlinks to relevant documentation.
>>>
>>>     The objective is to ensure that community leaders and
>>>     participants, especially remote participants, are able to
>>>     evaluate whether or not this is a session they wish to attend,
>>>     so the more information you can give about it the better.
>>>
>>>     ???  ?  ?  ?  Preferred?  Day/Time - please state
>>>     Avoid overlapping regularly scheduled breaks (see below).
>>>
>>>     ???  ?  ?  ?  Estimated Number of Attendees
>>>
>>>     ???  ?  ?  ?  Remote Participation
>>>     Will you have remote presenters
>>>
>>>     ???  ?  ?  ?  Audio Visual Requirements
>>>     ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  Please note any special
>>>     requests with regard to:
>>>     Adobe connect, - name of person who could run Adobe Connect
>>>     audio streaming,
>>>     recording,
>>>     transcription,
>>>     teleconferencing,
>>>     Presentation lap top,
>>>     Audio connection to the presentation laptop (video to show, etc).
>>>
>>>     ? Please note: Kindly inform the Technical Staff in the room
>>>     when you will be breaking for morning/afternoon coffee breaks
>>>     and lunch breaks so that they are there to restart the audio
>>>     streaming, the recordings and the phone lines.
>>>
>>>     Helsinki Schedule - time blocks
>>>     08:00-09:00?  ?  60 min (Welcome on Monday Only)
>>>     09:15-10:30?  ?  75 min
>>>     10:30-10:45?  ?  15 min COFFEE BREAK
>>>     10:45-12:00?  ?  75 min
>>>     12:00-13:30?  ?  90 min LUNCH BREAK
>>>     13:30-14:45?  ?  75 min
>>>     14:45-15:15?  ?  30 min COFFEE BREAK
>>>     15:15-16:45?  ?  90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>>>     17:00-18:30?  ?  90 min CROSS COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS
>>>
>>>     Given that this is the first time we are experimenting with the
>>>     meeting B format, it is still unclear what room availability
>>>     there will be so please be patient & understanding, we will do
>>>     our best to accommodate your meetings.
>>>     Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
>>>     Thank you so much.
>>>     Kind regards.
>>>
>>>     Glen
>>>
>>>     Glen de Saint G??ry
>>>     GNSO Secretariat
>>>
>>>     ----- End forwarded message -----
>>>
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>     PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto: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
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
>> Center for Democracy & Technology |cdt.org <http://cdt.org>
>> E:mshears at cdt.org  | T: +44.771.247.2987
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto: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/20160512/a6b7cb65/attachment-0001.html>


From ncsg  Thu May 12 17:34:40 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 17:34:40 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
Message-ID: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>

[copying to both EC and PC]

As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
meeting proposal. Comments welcome.

Tapani

----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----

Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
discussion: What are the challenges for this year?

Overview

The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
on each item.  Preliminary topics include:

 * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
 * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
 * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
 * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)

Who Should Attend?

NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
preferred.

----- End forwarded message -----



From avri  Thu May 12 18:20:22 2016
From: avri (avri doria)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 11:20:22 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <57349F36.7090704@apc.org>

Hi

BTW, we will be, I hope, in a constituency review of the some of the
GTLD subsequent Procedures PDP issues during the period of the Helsinki
meeting.

Don't know if you will want to deal with that at all while in Helsinki.

avri


On 12-May-16 10:34, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> [copying to both EC and PC]
>
> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>
> Tapani
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>
> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>
> Overview
>
> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>
>  * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>  * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>  * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>  * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>
> Who Should Attend?
>
> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
> preferred.
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




From ncsg  Wed May 18 12:34:39 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 12:34:39 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.

I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
another topic, please let me know ASAP.

Tapani

On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:

> [copying to both EC and PC]
> 
> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
> 
> Tapani
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
> 
> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
> 
> Overview
> 
> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
> 
>  * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>  * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>  * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>  * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
> 
> Who Should Attend?
> 
> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
> preferred.
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----



From klaus.stoll  Wed May 18 12:42:02 2016
From: klaus.stoll (Klaus Stoll)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 05:42:02 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <9a1f53c1-12dc-d206-29d7-92247ccfea45@gkpfoundation.org>

Dear Tapani

Joan or Martin could talk on Mentoring I think.

Joan/Martin, let us know, asap

Yours

Klaus

On 5/18/2016 5:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>
> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>
> Tapani
>
> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>
>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>
>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>
>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>
>> Overview
>>
>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>
>>   * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>   * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>   * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>   * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>
>> Who Should Attend?
>>
>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>> preferred.
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




From mshears  Wed May 18 13:13:49 2016
From: mshears (Matthew Shears)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 11:13:49 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <573C405D.2010307@cdt.org>

I support this proposal.

On 5/18/2016 10:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>
> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>
> Tapani
>
> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>
>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>
>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>
>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>
>> Overview
>>
>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>
>>   * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>   * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>   * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>   * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>
>> Who Should Attend?
>>
>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>> preferred.
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987




From mariliamaciel  Wed May 18 13:23:56 2016
From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 07:23:56 -0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <573C405D.2010307@cdt.org>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<573C405D.2010307@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK2A4Cz2ZMgNsSXYHGB=ArCQiAEsJyG+5YGwh2pa5Hzwiw@mail.gmail.com>

I support it too.
Thanks
On May 18, 2016 7:14 AM, "Matthew Shears" <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:

> I support this proposal.
>
> On 5/18/2016 10:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>
>> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>>
>> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
>> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
>> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
>> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>
>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>>
>>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>>
>>> Tapani
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <
>>> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>>
>>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us,
>>> so
>>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>>
>>> Overview
>>>
>>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among
>>> NCSG
>>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year,
>>> and
>>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We
>>> will
>>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and
>>> think
>>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the
>>> discussion
>>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>>
>>>   * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>>   * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>>   * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>>   * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>>
>>> Who Should Attend?
>>>
>>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>>> preferred.
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
> --
>
> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
> Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
> E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160518/65b9f071/attachment-0001.html>


From ncsg  Wed May 18 13:32:58 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 13:32:58 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <9a1f53c1-12dc-d206-29d7-92247ccfea45@gkpfoundation.org>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<9a1f53c1-12dc-d206-29d7-92247ccfea45@gkpfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <20160518103258.GD18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

I'd be happy to have either Joan or Martin talk about mentoring.
Time is short though - I'll be offline this afternoon and evening,
I need to get this finalized in about two hours (by 1230 UTC).
If I don't get confirmation from Joan or Martin by then, this
goes out without the Mentoring topic.

(I don't know how unchangeable this agenda would then be,
it would probably depend on how long timeslot we'd get.)

Tapani

On May 18 05:42, Klaus Stoll (klaus.stoll at gkpfoundation.org) wrote:

> Dear Tapani
> 
> Joan or Martin could talk on Mentoring I think.
> 
> Joan/Martin, let us know, asap
> 
> Yours
> 
> Klaus
> 
> On 5/18/2016 5:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> >This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
> >
> >I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
> >Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
> >about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
> >another topic, please let me know ASAP.
> >
> >Tapani
> >
> >On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> >
> >>[copying to both EC and PC]
> >>
> >>As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
> >>meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
> >>
> >>Tapani
> >>
> >>----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
> >>
> >>Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
> >>meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
> >>somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
> >>the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
> >>discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
> >>
> >>Overview
> >>
> >>The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
> >>members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
> >>discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
> >>have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
> >>about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
> >>issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
> >>on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
> >>
> >>  * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
> >>  * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
> >>  * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
> >>  * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
> >>
> >>Who Should Attend?
> >>
> >>NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
> >>new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
> >>policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
> >>moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
> >>primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
> >>at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
> >>preferred.
> >>
> >>----- End forwarded message -----



From egmorris1  Wed May 18 13:51:50 2016
From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 12:51:50 +0200
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <01BA5009-0085-429F-A708-B12E371789D1@toast.net>

Hi Tapani,

I believe I did object, perhaps not formally. I think it is ridiculous to use our limited time F2F to talk about the NCSG position on issues when the policy committee, our vehicle for acting upon the issues, is completely dysfunctional. Our public comments are a rarity and generally occur only on mega issues or when 1 individual just decides to do it. Matt had a post earlier where he suggested meeting and trying to resolve many of these structural issues and trying to make progress going forward. It was a good idea then and is a good idea now.

I also support your idea for dropping the mentoring talk, although for a different reason. This is a policy meeting. Mentoring is administrative. That would be best discussed at the A or C meetings.

Nevertheless I realise I may be in the minority in my views. I also have a radical view that lunch is for lunch. Many of us are scheduled from 8 - 18:30 on all four days with few breaks. I, at least, am not a robot. I'm sure there are others in addition to myself who need an occasional break to maintain effectiveness and, yes, prepare for other meetings. I think we should be careful about over scheduling during this first policy meeting. At regular meetings there is a lot of interesting fluff, where you can just go and listen. These four days are mostly substantive where participation is necessary and decisions will be made. Pacing wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Ed



Sent from my iPhone

> On 18 May 2016, at 11:35, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> 
> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
> 
> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
> 
> Tapani
> 
>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>> 
>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>> 
>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>> 
>> Tapani
>> 
>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>> 
>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>> 
>> Overview
>> 
>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>> 
>> * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>> * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>> * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>> * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>> 
>> Who Should Attend?
>> 
>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>> preferred.
>> 
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From ncsg  Wed May 18 14:01:35 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 14:01:35 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <01BA5009-0085-429F-A708-B12E371789D1@toast.net>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<01BA5009-0085-429F-A708-B12E371789D1@toast.net>
Message-ID: <20160518110134.GE18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

Hi Ed,

The reason I'm proposing this meeting is our last policy call,
where people rather strongly argued we should have such a meeting,
and I see support for it here now as well.

As for mentoring talk, as I said I won't do it, but I'm open
to other opinions and generally happy to arrange whatever
people want to do. Anyway, if nobody volunteers within
about 90 minutes the mentoring talk is out.
Otherwise, I'll count opposition (so far you)
and support (Klaus), meaning if nobody else speaks and
someone volunteers (presumably supporting it!) it's a go.

Tapani

On May 18 12:51, Edward Morris (egmorris1 at toast.net) wrote:

> Hi Tapani,
> 
> I believe I did object, perhaps not formally. I think it is ridiculous to use our limited time F2F to talk about the NCSG position on issues when the policy committee, our vehicle for acting upon the issues, is completely dysfunctional. Our public comments are a rarity and generally occur only on mega issues or when 1 individual just decides to do it. Matt had a post earlier where he suggested meeting and trying to resolve many of these structural issues and trying to make progress going forward. It was a good idea then and is a good idea now.
> 
> I also support your idea for dropping the mentoring talk, although for a different reason. This is a policy meeting. Mentoring is administrative. That would be best discussed at the A or C meetings.
> 
> Nevertheless I realise I may be in the minority in my views. I also have a radical view that lunch is for lunch. Many of us are scheduled from 8 - 18:30 on all four days with few breaks. I, at least, am not a robot. I'm sure there are others in addition to myself who need an occasional break to maintain effectiveness and, yes, prepare for other meetings. I think we should be careful about over scheduling during this first policy meeting. At regular meetings there is a lot of interesting fluff, where you can just go and listen. These four days are mostly substantive where participation is necessary and decisions will be made. Pacing wouldn't be such a bad idea.
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On 18 May 2016, at 11:35, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> > 
> > This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
> > 
> > I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
> > Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
> > about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
> > another topic, please let me know ASAP.
> > 
> > Tapani
> > 
> >> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> >> 
> >> [copying to both EC and PC]
> >> 
> >> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
> >> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
> >> 
> >> Tapani
> >> 
> >> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
> >> 
> >> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
> >> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
> >> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
> >> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
> >> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
> >> 
> >> Overview
> >> 
> >> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
> >> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
> >> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
> >> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
> >> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
> >> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
> >> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
> >> 
> >> * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
> >> * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
> >> * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
> >> * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
> >> 
> >> Who Should Attend?
> >> 
> >> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
> >> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
> >> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
> >> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
> >> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
> >> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
> >> preferred.
> >> 
> >> ----- End forwarded message -----



From egmorris1  Wed May 18 14:22:00 2016
From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 13:22:00 +0200
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <20160518110134.GE18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<01BA5009-0085-429F-A708-B12E371789D1@toast.net>
	<20160518110134.GE18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <4A94330F-752D-4BBB-B9CE-05682A64000E@toast.net>

No problem Tapani.

I just wanted to make the point that in my four years here issues come and go but the relative dysfunction of the PC is a constant. This despite having some of our most talented and capable volunteers chairing it. Unless we get serious about fixing our procedures and structural problems we'll never be the effective advocacy force our members deserve. 

Ed

Sent from my iPhone

> On 18 May 2016, at 13:02, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ed,
> 
> The reason I'm proposing this meeting is our last policy call,
> where people rather strongly argued we should have such a meeting,
> and I see support for it here now as well.
> 
> As for mentoring talk, as I said I won't do it, but I'm open
> to other opinions and generally happy to arrange whatever
> people want to do. Anyway, if nobody volunteers within
> about 90 minutes the mentoring talk is out.
> Otherwise, I'll count opposition (so far you)
> and support (Klaus), meaning if nobody else speaks and
> someone volunteers (presumably supporting it!) it's a go.
> 
> Tapani
> 
>> On May 18 12:51, Edward Morris (egmorris1 at toast.net) wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Tapani,
>> 
>> I believe I did object, perhaps not formally. I think it is ridiculous to use our limited time F2F to talk about the NCSG position on issues when the policy committee, our vehicle for acting upon the issues, is completely dysfunctional. Our public comments are a rarity and generally occur only on mega issues or when 1 individual just decides to do it. Matt had a post earlier where he suggested meeting and trying to resolve many of these structural issues and trying to make progress going forward. It was a good idea then and is a good idea now.
>> 
>> I also support your idea for dropping the mentoring talk, although for a different reason. This is a policy meeting. Mentoring is administrative. That would be best discussed at the A or C meetings.
>> 
>> Nevertheless I realise I may be in the minority in my views. I also have a radical view that lunch is for lunch. Many of us are scheduled from 8 - 18:30 on all four days with few breaks. I, at least, am not a robot. I'm sure there are others in addition to myself who need an occasional break to maintain effectiveness and, yes, prepare for other meetings. I think we should be careful about over scheduling during this first policy meeting. At regular meetings there is a lot of interesting fluff, where you can just go and listen. These four days are mostly substantive where participation is necessary and decisions will be made. Pacing wouldn't be such a bad idea.
>> 
>> Ed
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 18 May 2016, at 11:35, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>>> 
>>> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
>>> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
>>> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
>>> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>>> 
>>> Tapani
>>> 
>>>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>>> 
>>>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>>>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>>> 
>>>> Tapani
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>>> 
>>>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>>>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>>>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
>>>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>>>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>>> 
>>>> Overview
>>>> 
>>>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
>>>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
>>>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
>>>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
>>>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>>>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
>>>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>>> 
>>>> * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>>> * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>>> * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>>> * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>>> 
>>>> Who Should Attend?
>>>> 
>>>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>>>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>>>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>>>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>>>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>>>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>>>> preferred.
>>>> 
>>>> ----- End forwarded message -----




From stephanie.perrin  Wed May 18 18:24:30 2016
From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 11:24:30 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <01BA5009-0085-429F-A708-B12E371789D1@toast.net>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<01BA5009-0085-429F-A708-B12E371789D1@toast.net>
Message-ID: <be115772-8648-7558-7439-cbf9b5ec1a30@mail.utoronto.ca>

I certainly agree that we need to discuss how to make the Policy 
COmmittee function better, but since we only have an hour (by the time 
you take off getting food and bathroom break) I think we would need to 
have done quite a bit of prep work on this intractable issue prior to 
the meeting.  We need to analyse what is not working, what systems we 
need, who is on first who is on second, etc. It is fundamentally an 
administrative problem, which we are not supposed to be spending our 
time on during the short meeting format....although I think it is important.

So perhaps we could launch a policy cttee structural discussion at the 
next tele-meeting and get going on this.

Steph


On 2016-05-18 6:51, Edward Morris wrote:
> Hi Tapani,
>
> I believe I did object, perhaps not formally. I think it is ridiculous to use our limited time F2F to talk about the NCSG position on issues when the policy committee, our vehicle for acting upon the issues, is completely dysfunctional. Our public comments are a rarity and generally occur only on mega issues or when 1 individual just decides to do it. Matt had a post earlier where he suggested meeting and trying to resolve many of these structural issues and trying to make progress going forward. It was a good idea then and is a good idea now.
>
> I also support your idea for dropping the mentoring talk, although for a different reason. This is a policy meeting. Mentoring is administrative. That would be best discussed at the A or C meetings.
>
> Nevertheless I realise I may be in the minority in my views. I also have a radical view that lunch is for lunch. Many of us are scheduled from 8 - 18:30 on all four days with few breaks. I, at least, am not a robot. I'm sure there are others in addition to myself who need an occasional break to maintain effectiveness and, yes, prepare for other meetings. I think we should be careful about over scheduling during this first policy meeting. At regular meetings there is a lot of interesting fluff, where you can just go and listen. These four days are mostly substantive where participation is necessary and decisions will be made. Pacing wouldn't be such a bad idea.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 18 May 2016, at 11:35, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>>
>> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>>
>> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
>> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
>> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
>> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>>
>>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>>
>>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>>
>>> Tapani
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>>
>>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
>>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>>
>>> Overview
>>>
>>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
>>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
>>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
>>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
>>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
>>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>>
>>> * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>> * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>> * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>> * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>>
>>> Who Should Attend?
>>>
>>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>>> preferred.
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160518/a2ed9af8/attachment-0001.html>


From lanfran  Wed May 18 18:34:30 2016
From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 11:34:30 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <573C405D.2010307@cdt.org>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi> <573C405D.2010307@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <573C8B86.2070102@yorku.ca>

All, I support the proposal (including dropping the mentoring for now) 
and will be there.

Sam L.

On 5/18/2016 6:13 AM, Matthew Shears wrote:
> I support this proposal.
>
> On 5/18/2016 10:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>>
>> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
>> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
>> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
>> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>
>>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>>
>>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>>
>>> Tapani
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin 
>>> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>>
>>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG 
>>> policy
>>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join 
>>> us, so
>>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG 
>>> Policy
>>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>>
>>> Overview
>>>
>>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion 
>>> among NCSG
>>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this 
>>> year, and
>>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  
>>> We will
>>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read 
>>> and think
>>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the 
>>> discussion
>>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>>
>>>   * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>>   * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>>   * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>>   * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>>
>>> Who Should Attend?
>>>
>>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to 
>>> participate in
>>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be 
>>> present
>>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>>> preferred.
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>


-- 
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
in an unjust state" -Confucius
  ???????????????????????
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
email: Lanfran at Yorku.ca   Skype: slanfranco
blog:  http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852




From mariliamaciel  Thu May 19 01:08:52 2016
From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 19:08:52 -0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Call for consensus on PC: NCSG proposed comments on draft
	ICANN bylaws
Message-ID: <CACpVkK1M790pOMz3GE40Lh=ih3ON=kUmj6VONRCn+r+HtuWYRg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Milton,

I am copying the list of the policy committee. As far as I understand you
are calling for consensus on the draft statement, for it to be submitted as
a NCSG statement correct?

If we do not hear objections from the PC until 12:00 (midday) UTC on the
20th, I believe we can move forward and present this statement on behalf of
the NCSG.

Thank you and best regards
Mar?lia

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
wrote:

> Niels and Tatiana have added comments about the HR Section of the bylaws.
> Here is what we plan to turn in by May 20:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aAph84PWFWvxbKKmGG-PHQh9yJztarUO6qF8J6Ebv6s/edit?usp=sharing
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > > Dear colleagues
> > >
> > > Here are some proposed comments on the draft bylaws.
> > > Most of them echo comments already made by the CCWG and the ICG, but I
> > > think it worthwhile for NCSG to weigh in.
> > >
> > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aAph84PWFWvxbKKmGG-
> > PHQh9yJztarUO6q
> > > F8J6Ebv6s/edit?usp=sharing
> > >
> > > Dr. Milton L. Mueller
> > > Professor, School of Public Policy
> > > Georgia Institute of Technology
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
*Mar?lia Maciel*
Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law
School
http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts
DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu
PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160518/44d6fd84/attachment.html>


From avri  Thu May 19 01:46:39 2016
From: avri (avri doria)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 18:46:39 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <573C8B86.2070102@yorku.ca>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi> <573C405D.2010307@cdt.org>
	<573C8B86.2070102@yorku.ca>
Message-ID: <5ab8a2be-1ee0-46c3-878e-7b672739800f@apc.org>

hi,

Assuming i get to Helsinki, I will be there.

I would have volunteered to talk about mentoring, but since i might not
be there and since it is only an hour and nobody really wanted to hear
about it, i didn't.

btw, i think that the PC worked decently the year I was the alternate
chair, but i did a lot of work to make that happen, such as writing a
lot.  the role requires a bunch of near daily work. and a lot of herding
unwilling cats.

avri



On 18-May-16 11:34, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
> All, I support the proposal (including dropping the mentoring for now)
> and will be there.
>
> Sam L.
>
> On 5/18/2016 6:13 AM, Matthew Shears wrote:
>> I support this proposal.
>>
>> On 5/18/2016 10:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>>> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>>>
>>> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
>>> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
>>> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
>>> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>>>
>>> Tapani
>>>
>>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>>
>>>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>>>
>>>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>>>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Tapani
>>>>
>>>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin
>>>> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>>>
>>>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG
>>>> policy
>>>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>>>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join
>>>> us, so
>>>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG
>>>> Policy
>>>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>>>
>>>> Overview
>>>>
>>>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion
>>>> among NCSG
>>>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this
>>>> year, and
>>>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective. 
>>>> We will
>>>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read
>>>> and think
>>>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss
>>>> current
>>>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the
>>>> discussion
>>>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>>>
>>>>   * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>>>   * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>>>   * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>>>   * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>>>
>>>> Who Should Attend?
>>>>
>>>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>>>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to
>>>> participate in
>>>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>>>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be
>>>> others. A
>>>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be
>>>> present
>>>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>>>> preferred.
>>>>
>>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




From ncsg  Thu May 19 11:31:04 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 11:31:04 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki
In-Reply-To: <CADwmshK_TRvuju6KvFwad3-N+5_eUiY5-_YuDDcYCf5pVcHLpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160512143440.GB12620@tarvainen.info>
	<20160518093439.GA18982@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<9a1f53c1-12dc-d206-29d7-92247ccfea45@gkpfoundation.org>
	<CADwmshK_TRvuju6KvFwad3-N+5_eUiY5-_YuDDcYCf5pVcHLpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20160519083104.GB7859@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

Hi Joan, all,

Unfortunately I got your message too late and the request went
out without the mentoring item.

We may, however, be able to change the agenda once we know
how much time (if any) we get.

My apologies for leaving this to the last minute.

Tapani

On May 18 08:56, Joan Kerr (joankerr at fbsc.org) wrote:

> Hi Tapani, Klaus, Martin
> 
> I cam talk about mentorship at ICANN as whole, the importance of
> mentorship, and the new NPOC Mentorship initiative.
> 
> I think Martin could be good for the topic as well.
> 
> Joan.
> 
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Klaus Stoll <klaus.stoll at gkpfoundation.org>
> wrote:
> 
> > Dear Tapani
> >
> > Joan or Martin could talk on Mentoring I think.
> >
> > Joan/Martin, let us know, asap
> >
> > Yours
> >
> > Klaus
> >
> > On 5/18/2016 5:34 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> >
> >> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
> >>
> >> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
> >> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
> >> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
> >> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
> >>
> >> Tapani
> >>
> >> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> >>
> >> [copying to both EC and PC]
> >>>
> >>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
> >>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
> >>>
> >>> Tapani
> >>>
> >>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <
> >>> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
> >>>
> >>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
> >>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
> >>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us,
> >>> so
> >>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
> >>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
> >>>
> >>> Overview
> >>>
> >>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among
> >>> NCSG
> >>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year,
> >>> and
> >>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We
> >>> will
> >>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and
> >>> think
> >>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
> >>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the
> >>> discussion
> >>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
> >>>
> >>>   * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
> >>>   * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
> >>>   * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
> >>>   * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
> >>>
> >>> Who Should Attend?
> >>>
> >>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
> >>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
> >>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
> >>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
> >>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
> >>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
> >>> preferred.
> >>>
> >>> ----- End forwarded message -----
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg



From ncsg  Tue May 24 08:33:19 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:33:19 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Fw: Call for Volunteers - GNSO Selection Committee
Message-ID: <20160524053319.GA20528@kusti.tarvainen.info>

Do we have any volunteers for GNSO liaison?

Deadline is next Friday, May 27 - only 3 days from now
(no, it is not a typo).

And that's for GNSO - we should negotiate with the CSG before
that, if we want to have our own candidate in.

Should we put out a call to tne NCSG-DISCUSS list?
Note though that this calls for someone experienced,
preferably ex-councillor or one whose term is just ending.

Tapani

----- Forwarded message from Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest at acu.edu.au> -----

Dear Steve and Tapani,


I write to you both in your respective CSG/NCSG roles to emphasise and (if I can!) field any questions you might have about the processes Council needs to put in place to enliven our engagement in the CSC.


The first step in the process is the establishment of a selection committee to choose our representatives on the CSC (you'll see from Donna's listing below that these numbers put the NCPH in an awkward position, so the selection committee will have quite a challenging task).


I'll follow up with Donna but I suspect the typo on the response deadline is 27 May, not 27 June. I expect we will need more time. If we have scope for a discussion about the CSC more broadly across the house on this in Helsinki, in my view that would be ideal, but I leave it to you two to decide how best to tackle this.


Best wishes to you both, looking forward to seeing you in Helsinki,


Heather




________________________________
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org <owner-council at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 11:51
To: council at gnso.icann.org
Subject: [council] Call for Volunteers - GNSO Selection Committee


Dear Councilors



During the last Council meeting I provided a brief overview of some of the GNSO Council obligations associated with the implementation of the CWG's Transition Proposal and in particular, those related to establishing a Customer Standing Committee (CSC). The CSC is intended to monitor the performance of IANA post-transition and NTIA has requested that the CSC be established by 15 August 2016, in order to be ready to undertake its role upon transition.



The CSC will comprise the following:

Members

2 x gTLD registry operators to be selected by the RySG (mandatory)

2 x ccTLD registry operators to be selected by the ccNSO (mandatory)

1 x registry operator not considered to be a ccTLD or gTLD (optional)



Liaisons (all are non-mandatory with the exception of IANA)

1 x IANA

1 x GNSO (non-registry)

1 x ALAC

1 x GAC

1 x ASO

1 x RSSAC

1 x SSAC



The GNSO Council is responsible for selecting the GNSO Liaison, and also approving the final composition of the CSC in conjunction with the ccNSO Council. To that end, we are seeking volunteers to serve as the GNSO Council Selection Committee to select the GNSO Liaison for the CSC and to also review the proposed final composition of the CSC and make a recommendation to the Council for approval. The optimal number would be somewhere between 3 to 5 members, representing a cross-section of the Council. In the event that we have no volunteers, James, Heather and I have agreed to serve as the Selection Committee.



It was anticipated that ICANN would post a call for Expressions of Interest last week, but this has been delayed pending approval of the CWG. However, given the timeline, it would be helpful if those interested could respond to this email by Friday 27 June 2016, 23:59 UTC.



More detail regarding the GNSO Council obligations regarding the CSC is provided in the attached documents.



Please let me know if you have any questions.



Thanks



Donna



Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc.
Policy and Industry Affairs Manager

Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin at neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin at neustar.biz>



________________________________

The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately and delete the original message.

Follow Neustar:   [cid:image001.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>   [cid:image002.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>   [cid:image003.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar>

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.




















----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen



From ncsg  Tue May 24 08:43:06 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:43:06 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Re: [EC-NCSG] Fwd: ICANN Board Seat Elections: GNSO
 Operating Procedures Section 2.4.3
Message-ID: <20160524054306.GA22325@kusti.tarvainen.info>

Another call for volunteers. EC had no comments.

This should not be too strenuous, I think.

----- Forwarded message from Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> -----
On May 18 12:42, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:

> We (= NCPH) need to update our Board rep election procedures.

Following this up, I got this suggestion:

On May 18 20:57, Metalitz, Steven (met at msk.com) wrote:

> In order to move this process along, may I suggest that each
> of the stakeholder groups put forward a couple of people to form a
> drafting team to start working on a procedure?

This sounds like a good suggestion to me.

Ideas who should be in the drafting team?

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen


----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen



From dave  Tue May 24 09:58:38 2016
From: dave (David Cake)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 14:58:38 +0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Re: [EC-NCSG] Fwd: ICANN Board Seat Elections:
	GNSO Operating Procedures Section 2.4.3
In-Reply-To: <20160524054306.GA22325@kusti.tarvainen.info>
References: <20160524054306.GA22325@kusti.tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <93860F14-324B-403D-839C-D34F33F4DBF6@davecake.net>

I would like to volunteer to be in the drafting team. 

> On 24 May 2016, at 1:43 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> 
> Another call for volunteers. EC had no comments.
> 
> This should not be too strenuous, I think.
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> -----
> On May 18 12:42, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> 
>> We (= NCPH) need to update our Board rep election procedures.
> 
> Following this up, I got this suggestion:
> 
> On May 18 20:57, Metalitz, Steven (met at msk.com) wrote:
> 
>> In order to move this process along, may I suggest that each
>> of the stakeholder groups put forward a couple of people to form a
>> drafting team to start working on a procedure?
> 
> This sounds like a good suggestion to me.
> 
> Ideas who should be in the drafting team?
> 
> -- 
> Tapani Tarvainen
> 
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> -- 
> Tapani Tarvainen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From ncsg  Tue May 24 10:26:36 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:26:36 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Re: [EC-NCSG] Fwd: ICANN Board Seat Elections:
 GNSO Operating Procedures Section 2.4.3
In-Reply-To: <93860F14-324B-403D-839C-D34F33F4DBF6@davecake.net>
References: <20160524054306.GA22325@kusti.tarvainen.info>
	<93860F14-324B-403D-839C-D34F33F4DBF6@davecake.net>
Message-ID: <20160524072636.GA1841@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

Hi Dave,

That's great!

Any others?

We'd want two people for this (maybe three, no more).

Tapani


On May 24 14:58, David Cake (dave at davecake.net) wrote:

> I would like to volunteer to be in the drafting team. 
> 
> > On 24 May 2016, at 1:43 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> > 
> > Another call for volunteers. EC had no comments.
> > 
> > This should not be too strenuous, I think.
> > 
> > ----- Forwarded message from Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> -----
> > On May 18 12:42, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> > 
> >> We (= NCPH) need to update our Board rep election procedures.
> > 
> > Following this up, I got this suggestion:
> > 
> > On May 18 20:57, Metalitz, Steven (met at msk.com) wrote:
> > 
> >> In order to move this process along, may I suggest that each
> >> of the stakeholder groups put forward a couple of people to form a
> >> drafting team to start working on a procedure?
> > 
> > This sounds like a good suggestion to me.
> > 
> > Ideas who should be in the drafting team?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Tapani Tarvainen
> > 
> > 
> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > 
> > -- 
> > Tapani Tarvainen
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > PC-NCSG mailing list
> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg



From aelsadr  Tue May 24 17:18:08 2016
From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 16:18:08 +0200
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Call for Volunteers - GNSO Selection Committee
In-Reply-To: <20160524053319.GA20528@kusti.tarvainen.info>
References: <20160524053319.GA20528@kusti.tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <E585283C-9B29-464C-BA5C-BCAE073156E1@egyptig.org>

Hi,

I would forward this to the full NCSG-DISCUSS list. I?m not sure how the GNSO procedure to select an appointee from the GNSO to the CSC came to be. I?m not sure why this committee needs to be limited in its membership to Councillors. I might have missed this, if it has been previously discussed.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

Amr

> On May 24, 2016, at 7:33 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> 
> Do we have any volunteers for GNSO liaison?
> 
> Deadline is next Friday, May 27 - only 3 days from now
> (no, it is not a typo).
> 
> And that's for GNSO - we should negotiate with the CSG before
> that, if we want to have our own candidate in.
> 
> Should we put out a call to tne NCSG-DISCUSS list?
> Note though that this calls for someone experienced,
> preferably ex-councillor or one whose term is just ending.
> 
> Tapani
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest at acu.edu.au> -----
> 
> Dear Steve and Tapani,
> 
> 
> I write to you both in your respective CSG/NCSG roles to emphasise and (if I can!) field any questions you might have about the processes Council needs to put in place to enliven our engagement in the CSC.
> 
> 
> The first step in the process is the establishment of a selection committee to choose our representatives on the CSC (you'll see from Donna's listing below that these numbers put the NCPH in an awkward position, so the selection committee will have quite a challenging task).
> 
> 
> I'll follow up with Donna but I suspect the typo on the response deadline is 27 May, not 27 June. I expect we will need more time. If we have scope for a discussion about the CSC more broadly across the house on this in Helsinki, in my view that would be ideal, but I leave it to you two to decide how best to tackle this.
> 
> 
> Best wishes to you both, looking forward to seeing you in Helsinki,
> 
> 
> Heather
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org <owner-council at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 11:51
> To: council at gnso.icann.org
> Subject: [council] Call for Volunteers - GNSO Selection Committee
> 
> 
> Dear Councilors
> 
> 
> 
> During the last Council meeting I provided a brief overview of some of the GNSO Council obligations associated with the implementation of the CWG's Transition Proposal and in particular, those related to establishing a Customer Standing Committee (CSC). The CSC is intended to monitor the performance of IANA post-transition and NTIA has requested that the CSC be established by 15 August 2016, in order to be ready to undertake its role upon transition.
> 
> 
> 
> The CSC will comprise the following:
> 
> Members
> 
> 2 x gTLD registry operators to be selected by the RySG (mandatory)
> 
> 2 x ccTLD registry operators to be selected by the ccNSO (mandatory)
> 
> 1 x registry operator not considered to be a ccTLD or gTLD (optional)
> 
> 
> 
> Liaisons (all are non-mandatory with the exception of IANA)
> 
> 1 x IANA
> 
> 1 x GNSO (non-registry)
> 
> 1 x ALAC
> 
> 1 x GAC
> 
> 1 x ASO
> 
> 1 x RSSAC
> 
> 1 x SSAC
> 
> 
> 
> The GNSO Council is responsible for selecting the GNSO Liaison, and also approving the final composition of the CSC in conjunction with the ccNSO Council. To that end, we are seeking volunteers to serve as the GNSO Council Selection Committee to select the GNSO Liaison for the CSC and to also review the proposed final composition of the CSC and make a recommendation to the Council for approval. The optimal number would be somewhere between 3 to 5 members, representing a cross-section of the Council. In the event that we have no volunteers, James, Heather and I have agreed to serve as the Selection Committee.
> 
> 
> 
> It was anticipated that ICANN would post a call for Expressions of Interest last week, but this has been delayed pending approval of the CWG. However, given the timeline, it would be helpful if those interested could respond to this email by Friday 27 June 2016, 23:59 UTC.
> 
> 
> 
> More detail regarding the GNSO Council obligations regarding the CSC is provided in the attached documents.
> 
> 
> 
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Donna
> 
> 
> 
> Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc.
> Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
> 
> Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin at neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin at neustar.biz>
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately and delete the original message.
> 
> Follow Neustar:   [cid:image001.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>   [cid:image002.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>   [cid:image003.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
> 
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> -- 
> Tapani Tarvainen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From aelsadr  Tue May 24 17:38:16 2016
From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr)
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 16:38:16 +0200
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: ICANN Board Seat Elections: GNSO
	Operating Procedures Section 2.4.3
In-Reply-To: <20160524072636.GA1841@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
References: <20160524054306.GA22325@kusti.tarvainen.info>
	<93860F14-324B-403D-839C-D34F33F4DBF6@davecake.net>
	<20160524072636.GA1841@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <203B88F7-F5A4-4D6E-85D1-291DE17AE58E@egyptig.org>

Hi,

I?ll put my hand up. I?m also working on a new Council Chair election process, so am already warmed up for this. :)

Thanks.

Amr

> On May 24, 2016, at 9:26 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> 
> Hi Dave,
> 
> That's great!
> 
> Any others?
> 
> We'd want two people for this (maybe three, no more).
> 
> Tapani
> 
> 
> On May 24 14:58, David Cake (dave at davecake.net) wrote:
> 
>> I would like to volunteer to be in the drafting team. 
>> 
>>> On 24 May 2016, at 1:43 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Another call for volunteers. EC had no comments.
>>> 
>>> This should not be too strenuous, I think.
>>> 
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> -----
>>> On May 18 12:42, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>> 
>>>> We (= NCPH) need to update our Board rep election procedures.
>>> 
>>> Following this up, I got this suggestion:
>>> 
>>> On May 18 20:57, Metalitz, Steven (met at msk.com) wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In order to move this process along, may I suggest that each
>>>> of the stakeholder groups put forward a couple of people to form a
>>>> drafting team to start working on a procedure?
>>> 
>>> This sounds like a good suggestion to me.
>>> 
>>> Ideas who should be in the drafting team?
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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




From ncsg  Fri May 27 08:52:08 2016
From: ncsg (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 08:52:08 +0300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: ICANN Board Seat Elections: GNSO Operating
 Procedures Section 2.4.3
In-Reply-To: <203B88F7-F5A4-4D6E-85D1-291DE17AE58E@egyptig.org>
References: <20160524054306.GA22325@kusti.tarvainen.info>
	<93860F14-324B-403D-839C-D34F33F4DBF6@davecake.net>
	<20160524072636.GA1841@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>
	<203B88F7-F5A4-4D6E-85D1-291DE17AE58E@egyptig.org>
Message-ID: <20160527055208.GA28496@tehanu.it.jyu.fi>

OK, Amr and Dave it is. I'll notify Steve.

Tapani

On May 24 16:38, Amr Elsadr (aelsadr at egyptig.org) wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I?ll put my hand up. I?m also working on a new Council Chair election process, so am already warmed up for this. :)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Amr
> 
> > On May 24, 2016, at 9:26 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Dave,
> > 
> > That's great!
> > 
> > Any others?
> > 
> > We'd want two people for this (maybe three, no more).
> > 
> > Tapani
> > 
> > 
> > On May 24 14:58, David Cake (dave at davecake.net) wrote:
> > 
> >> I would like to volunteer to be in the drafting team. 
> >> 
> >>> On 24 May 2016, at 1:43 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Another call for volunteers. EC had no comments.
> >>> 
> >>> This should not be too strenuous, I think.
> >>> 
> >>> ----- Forwarded message from Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> -----
> >>> On May 18 12:42, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> We (= NCPH) need to update our Board rep election procedures.
> >>> 
> >>> Following this up, I got this suggestion:
> >>> 
> >>> On May 18 20:57, Metalitz, Steven (met at msk.com) wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> In order to move this process along, may I suggest that each
> >>>> of the stakeholder groups put forward a couple of people to form a
> >>>> drafting team to start working on a procedure?
> >>> 
> >>> This sounds like a good suggestion to me.
> >>> 
> >>> Ideas who should be in the drafting team?
> >>> 
> >>> -- 
> >>> Tapani Tarvainen
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> ----- End forwarded message -----



From mshears  Fri May 27 15:08:53 2016
From: mshears (Matthew Shears)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 13:08:53 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Moving forward on WS2 (Re: how do we move forward was Re:
 [] great opening ...)
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR07MB240813559CFC1742C3203E4BA1420@BY2PR07MB2408.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <Pine.BSO.4.64.1605242155050.10576@mail.alembic.net>
	<86332211.641.1464156878186.JavaMail.dorothykgordon@Dorothys-Air>
	<A090C408-0AFF-4831-AB7A-287AFB420E45@cyberinvasion.net>
	<92C6088A-6CED-41A3-A825-7293D15C2C9F@gmail.com>
	<dbaae98d-564b-17e4-e040-4d1a467fcb70@cdt.org>
	<5745b9ec.c6e58c0a.cf7ac.ffffc507@mx.google.com>
	<0fd3e2c2-ef53-9fba-7e0b-bb0ea6b6a3d1@apc.org>
	<574645fe.41298d0a.60d79.0c98@mx.google.com>
	<BY2PR07MB24081A64261B0A95BA51B5A8A1410@BY2PR07MB2408.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
	<5747162d.43008d0a.92dbc.428c@mx.google.com>
	<BY2PR07MB240824ECB660C59969512860A1410@BY2PR07MB2408.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
	<5aafe311-d0b2-2d89-7faf-957dde38ef4c@kathykleiman.com>
	<72F9FB57-6290-48AB-9B0E-7637C884E590@cyberinvasion.net>
	<9396172a-9321-361b-1acd-98db30777e76@cdt.org>
	<54d2ce2d-7a2d-9454-fa1e-9a0e7736e345@apc.org>
	<BY2PR07MB240813559CFC1742C3203E4BA1420@BY2PR07MB2408.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <b9fb768c-83e5-753b-15b4-8057993f7ce8@cdt.org>

Great idea.

So attaching the ppt sent out by Bernie in prep for ICANN Helsinki 
Sunday all day WS2 session.

These are the WS2 areas:

> Human Rights
> Jurisdiction
> SO/AC Accountability
> Ombudsman
> Transparency
> Staff Accountability
> Guidelines for standards of conduct presumed to be in good faith 
> associated with exercising removal of individual ICANN Board Directors
> Reviewing the CEP (as set forth in Section 4.3); and additional topic 
> carried over from WS1- IRP ?phase 2?

While it seems that staff will be circulating a google form survey to 
assess where folks may want to engage, it would be good to get a sense 
as to who might be interested in what.  Also, if there are any hardy 
souls who wish to step forward to be considered as DT leads, they should 
indicate so.   The process for selection of DT leads is unclear.

Ideally we would have representation in the DTs that has issue expertise 
and preferably CCWG experience, as well as a willingness to "get stuck 
in" and draft.

Perhaps we could have a call in the two weeks to kick start the 
conversation.  I know that there has been quite a bit of prep work done 
in the CCWP HR.  Perhaps we can identify  issue leaders for the call who 
can review/update the participants on the scope of the WS2 issues and 
propose approaches we might want to take?

Matthew


On 5/27/2016 8:22 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> Good suggestion, Avri.
> Let's get some strategy on Work Stream 2
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of
>> avri doria
>> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 5:29 PM
>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> Subject: how do we move forward was Re: [] great opening ...
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Should we be able to work on stuff on list and in other environments online in
>> the meantime?
>>
>> I think it would be good to talk about WS2 in NCSG before the one day
>> meeting in Helsinki some of us are hoping to  get to by hook or by crook (or
>> will be there in remote in any case).  Maybe a good time for our PC to plan a
>> webinar/discussion? Or maybe even a NCSG involvement campaign.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 26-May-16 16:56, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>> + 1 James
>>>
>>> But I think this raises an interesting question that's going to become
>>> more pressing post transition - which is how fast and how well
>>> NCSG/NCUC/NPOC can get up to speed in terms of not only their/our
>>> respective responsibilities with regard being part of the EC, but also
>>> in terms of what our views should be on WS2 - which at the moment is a
>>> hodge podge of issue areas that everyone is reading into.  While
>>> Helsinki is seemingly impossible to find time at for this type of
>>> important discussion - which shows how unhelpful this new structure is
>>> - perhaps we can find time to do a deep dive into these two matters in
>>> Hyderabad.
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/26/2016 8:12 PM, James Gannon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>> on behalf of Kathy Kleiman
>>>> <kathy at KATHYKLEIMAN.COM <mailto:kathy at KATHYKLEIMAN.COM>>
>>>> Reply-To: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at KATHYKLEIMAN.COM
>>>> <mailto:kathy at KATHYKLEIMAN.COM>>
>>>> Date: Thursday 26 May 2016 at 19:15
>>>> To: "NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" <NCSG-
>> DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
>>>> Subject: Re: great opening statement by Brett
>>>>
>>>>      All,
>>>>
>>>>      I think the nuances of the concerns are being missed. There is
>>>>      something much, much more than the mere transition of the US
>>>>      Government out of its current role. As Avri pointed out earlier
>>>>      today:  "This was linked to improvements in ICANN
>>>>      accountability.  We fought for that and got it. Upfront we agreed
>>>>      to this process be divided into two parts."
>>>>
>>>>      I think everyone agrees with the transition -- Bret certainly
>>>>      said he did at the hearing. But it is those improvements of ICANN
>>>>      Accountability that people are questioning. Are they fair? Are
>>>>      they balanced? Are they understood by all who will be impacted by
>>>>      them
>>>>
>>>> JG: This was a process of two years produced in an open and inclusive
>>>> manner for everyone who wanted to be at the table, everyone had their
>>>> chance for input, for assessment for including the views of their
>>>> stakeholders, I contend that yes everyone who is impacted by these
>>>> changes has been engaged with.
>>>>
>>>>      I have to tell you I am concerned because there seem to be a lot
>>>>      of "gotchas" -- meaning every time I hear someone testify about
>>>>      the details of the Accountability & Transition plan, someone else
>>>>      (involved with the process) says that he/she/it did not
>>>>      understand it that way. There was certainly a lot of last minute
>>>>      changes and maneuvering.  There is not, frankly, a lot of
>>>>      knowledge or understanding about the details of how this
>>>>      restructuring and reorganization is going to work.
>>>>
>>>> JG: I disagree with this, we have a comprehensive plan, with a large
>>>> amount of detail, to a level that shows the details needed to
>>>> understand. If people do not wish to read the proposal and gain
>>>> understanding then I don?t feel that they have the ability to sit at
>>>> the sidelines and criticise. Informed criticism and feedback is
>>>> welcome, posturing is not.
>>>>
>>>>      Rather than name-calling, or picture discussion, let's talk about
>>>>      the details (the devil's always there, right). Can a consensus
>>>>      policy really be appealed to an Independent Review Process
>>>>      proceeding by one of the multiple stakeholders involved?  Isn't
>>>>      that going to give those stakeholders with the most time and
>>>>      resources a third, fourth and fifth bite at the policies we are
>>>>      negotiating? Isn't that going to undermine our months and years
>>>>      of work in the policy development process and working groups?
>>>>      That's one question that no one has been able to answer for me.
>>>>
>>>> JG: Please I encourage everyone to read the proposal, so much
>>>> misinformation and fear uncertainty and doubt is being spread by
>>>> certain actors at the moment I really suggest people with concerns go
>>>> back to the source and stop listening to others who are trying to
>>>> further an agenda. PDP carveout are in the proposal for exactly that
>>>> reason.
>>>>
>>>> *Annex 2:*
>>>> Power: 3. Reject changes to Standard Bylaws Threshold to convene: Two
>>>> SOs/ACs, including the SO that led the PDP that requires the Bylaw
>>>> change (if any) Threshold to reject: Three support rejection,
>>>> including the SO that led the PDP that requires the Bylaw change (if
>>>> any), and no more than one objection
>>>>
>>>> *Annex 7:*
>>>> Challenges the result(s) of a Supporting Organization?s policy
>>>> development process (PDP) Notwithstanding the foregoing and
>>>> notwithstanding any required threshold for launching a community IRP,
>>>> no community IRP that challenges the result(s) of an SO?s policy
>>>> development process (PDP) may be launched without the support of the
>>>> SO that approved the policy recommendations from the PDP or, in the
>>>> case of the result(s) of a Cross Community Working Group (CCWG)
>>>> chartered by more than one SO, without the support of the SOs that
>>>> approved the policy recommendations from that CCWG.
>>>>
>>>>      Let's talk details - if you help us understand, we'll appreciate
>>>>      it. But this is much more than a transition from USG oversight...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kathy
>>>>
>>>> On 5/26/2016 12:26 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:*David Post [mailto:david.g.post at gmail.com]
>>>>>
>>>>> But that's not the goal, in my eyes. The goal is to create an
>>>>> institution that can manage these resources in a reasonable way, for
>>>>> the next [many] years.
>>>>>
>>>>> MM: As Avri noted, the goal of the stewardship transition was
>>>>> to?transition, i.e. get the US govt out of its current role. I am
>>>>> flabbergasted by the fact that you do not see the US oversight role
>>>>> as a broken part of the institution.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> MM: As someone who has written about early post-revolutionary
>>>>> America, I wonder how you would respond to my argument ?all these
>>>>> new democratic government models are new and untested. We don?t
>>>>> really know how well they will work. Why doesn?t the United States
>>>>> retain its status as a British colony under the King for a few
>>>>> years, and let him decide if the experiment has worked??
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All I'm suggesting is that it would hardly seem unreasonable, to me,
>>>>> if the USG took the position that while it is signing off on the
>>>>> transition, it is doing so subject to a kind of probationary period
>>>>> that will enable us all to understand better whether and how it
>>>>> actually works. Perhaps other countries will view that as a terribly
>>>>> untrustworthy move, perhaps they won't - I do think it helps that it
>>>>> is, fundamentally, quite a reasonable position to take.
>>>>>
>>>>> MM: So you assume that the USG is NOT part of the machine, it is a
>>>>> deus ex machina that we can invoke at any time to insert an entirely
>>>>> rational, undistorted corrective action on whatever happens?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights
>>> Project Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
>>> E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160527/d62c03d4/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CCWG-Acct - v2 WS2 plan and Helsinki agenda v3BT-2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 616387 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160527/d62c03d4/attachment-0001.pdf>


From mshears  Mon May 30 22:57:50 2016
From: mshears (Matthew Shears)
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 20:57:50 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Public Comment on the Articles of Incorporation
In-Reply-To: <CABAnqJNknp6b-iaOc9kcVXTsRqnP7wXEvrVj8raUQTRLy7bcEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABAnqJNknp6b-iaOc9kcVXTsRqnP7wXEvrVj8raUQTRLy7bcEA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <716392d2-b8cb-196c-cc4a-f644befed86e@cdt.org>

Folks the revised Articles of Incorporation are out for public comment:

https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-restated-articles-incorporation-2016-05-27-en

There hasn't been much traffic on this as they have just been put out 
for consultation.

One quick initial thought I noted below (based on a cursory read).

Looking forward to any additional thoughts on the AoI.

Matthew



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Public Comment on the Articles of Incorporation
Date: 	Mon, 30 May 2016 04:01:09 -0400
From: 	Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org>
To: 	Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>
CC: 	grace.abuhamad at icann.org <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>, 
accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
<accountability-cross-community at icann.org>



Agree with Jorge's point 2.

Particularly because at first quick read there seems there may be an 
inconsistency between the language used on the role of the MS community 
in determining the public interest between the new bylaws 1.2 (b) Core 
Value (ii) and article 2 of the amended AoI.  The former uses the words 
"to ensure" that the MS process is used to "ascertain the global public 
interest" while the latter seems to suggest that the global public 
interest "may be determined from time to time" by the MS community.

Matthew

On Monday, 30 May 2016, <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch 
<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:

    Dear Grace, dear co-Chairs

    I feel a side-by-side comparison of the new AoI with the old ones,
    including a section (1) explaining why every change is made and (2)
    pointing to the relevant section(s) of the CCWG Report and/or the
    ICG Report would be very helpful in order to prepare for this public
    consultation.

    Will such a document be made available?

    Thanks and regards

    Jorge

    *Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
    <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org');>
    [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
    <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org');>]
    *Im Auftrag von *Grace Abuhamad
    *Gesendet:* Freitag, 27. Mai 2016 21:52
    *An:* Accountability Cross Community
    <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
    <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community at icann.org');>>
    *Betreff:* [CCWG-ACCT] Public Comment on the Articles of Incorporation

    Dear all,

    Per the Board resolution earlier today, the Articles of
    Incorporation are now up for public comment:
    https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-restated-articles-incorporation-2016-05-27-en.



        Brief Overview

    /*Purpose:*/This Public Comment period seeks community input on the
    Draft Restated Articles of Incorporation developed to reflect the
    recommendations contained in the proposals by theIANA Stewardship
    Transition Coordination Group (ICG) and Cross Community Working
    Group on EnhancingICANNAccountability (CCWG-Accountability) as
    provided to theICANNBoard on 10 March 2016 and transmitted toNTIA.
    (See Resolutions2016.03.10.12-15
    <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en#2.b>and2016.03.10.16-19
    <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en#2.c>)

    /*Current Status:*/The proposed draft of the Restated Articles of
    Incorporation was developed collaboratively by theICANNlegal team
    and the independent counsel hired to advise the CCWG-Accountability
    and the Cross Community Working Group to Develop anIANA Stewardship
    Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship).
    Both the independent counsel to the community groups andICANN's
    General Counsel agree that the draft Restated Articles are
    consistent with the community proposals relating to theIANA
    Stewardship Transition.

    /*Next Steps:*/Any interested party may review and provide feedback
    on the draft Restated Articles during the public comment period. The
    comments will be analyzed and incorporated for theICANNBoard prior
    to its consideration of the adoption of the Restated Articles.
    Restated Articles must be adopted as part of the implementation
    planning process. Once adopted, the Restated Articles are expected
    to filed and go into effect in the eventNTIAapproves of theIANA
    Stewardship Transition Proposal and theIANAFunctions Contract expires.

    -- 

    *Grace Abuhamad*

    Manager, Public Policy

    *ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers*

    801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006

    Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638

    *Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? *

    *LEARN MORE <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. STAY
    UPDATED <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status>.
    FOLLOW <https://twitter.com/icann>. ENGAGE
    <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved>. *

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160530/96ddc7e9/attachment.html>