[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] For your review - EPDP Initiation Request and EPDP Team Charter Templates

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi ,

indeed we should flesh out positions here before sharing in council list
and coordinate our responses. I hope we can do tha bettert from now on.

I dont think vice-chair can be a role for external facilitator or mediator
as chairing involve admin work (scheduling calls, review notes etc),
project management tasks, reporting to council and community and so on. a
facilitator and/or meditaor can be there as support for leadership team or
chair and intervene for some cases like faciliating discussion or resolve
conflict. they can be seens as resources.
There is also the idea of legal counsel we should introduce more in the
discussion. that is important to be agreed in term of resourcing.

I understand that staff would like to have the minimal number in leadership
time to ensure quick responses when they ask them , however there is always
need to have vice-chair or co-chair to replace chair if needed or be a
backup. we can argue that EPDP team is not a long time commitment, in such
case we will need some mechanisms to ensure backup and handle chair absence.

for board, 1 liaison will be enough as board wll organize its work via a
board caucus and monitor the discussion. we need to be careful about the
number as we also want to keep representation from SO/AC to 1 and so
keeping the overall EPDP team size small.

Best,

Rafik

Le jeu. 14 juin 2018 à 16:47, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
écrit :

> Initial thoughts on EPDP leadership:
>
> 1 chair (from community)
> 1 vice chair (external facilitator / mediator)
> no more than that
> leadership not counted as part of the stakeholder group appointees (3/SG)
>
> but I can be persuaded otherwise... happy to hear other options.
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On 14 June 2018 4:39 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> other than the standard language in template in certain sections that is
> found usually in other charters, we are not supposed to be constrained and
> the council as drafting team will have to discuss them.
> So better as group we get to agree on some points. I think for the
> composition/membership we have clear position as we discussed that in our
> calls. for leadership, we need to discuss that further.
> for the scope, we need to go through the temporary specification including
> the annex, identify areas related policy to separate from implementation,
> and do a triage of what is priorirty for this EPDP from our standpoint. We
> will see later if there are commonalities with other groups.
> We can create a working document we can populate and do that in
> collaborative manner, not just discussing here. I understand some points
> about picket fence were made but we have to do our homework to identify the
> issues .
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> Le mer. 13 juin 2018 à 08:08, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> For further discussion...
>>
>> Ayden
>>
>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Marika Konings<marika.konings at icann.org>
>> Date: On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 01:01
>> Subject: Fwd: [council] For your review - EPDP Initiation Request and
>> EPDP Team Charter Templates
>> To: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>
>> Cc:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>>
>> As discussed during today’s extraordinary Council meeting, staff has gone
>> ahead and prepared a template for the EPDP Initiation Request as well as
>> the EPDP Team Charter (see attached). As there is some duplication between
>> the Initiation Request and the Charter, staff would like to suggest that
>> you focus your attention on the EPDP Team charter for now. Once elements
>> such as scope and team composition have been agreed on, these can then be
>> lifted from the charter into the EPDP Initiation Request. Also note that
>> staff has taken the liberty to prepopulate some of the sections of the
>> charter to facilitate your deliberations. These entries are either based on
>> existing charter language / practices / procedures and/or aspects that have
>> come up in the context of the discussions to date, including the PDP 3.0
>> conversations. In addition, staff has flagged some items highlighted in
>> yellow that will require further feedback before draft language can be
>> added. Of course, it is up to you to edit / delete / add as you deem
>> appropriate. If there is anything further that staff can do to facilitate
>> your deliberations and drafting, please let me know.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Marika
>>
>>
>>
>> *Marika Konings*
>>
>> *Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation
>> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *
>>
>> *Email: marika.konings at icann.org <marika.konings at icann.org>  *
>>
>>
>>
>> *Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*
>>
>> *Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses
>> <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
>> <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>. *
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180614/7308c130/attachment.htm>