[NCSG-PC] Discussion with CSG leadership

[Benjamin Akinmoyeje]

Dear Chair and Farzi,
Good day. I know I am super behind in deciding on these topics.

Section B,
ICANN structural review requirements -> Biased Metrics and imbalanced panel
issues with structural reviews and safeguards for minority group
representations.

Kind regards,
Benjamin


On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 4:55 AM Rafik Dammak via NCSG-PC <
ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote:

> Hi Farzaneh,
>
> Thanks for those suggestions, I will share with them and see the reaction.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
> Le lun. 27 juil. 2026 à 13:13, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>
>> Hi Rafik
>>
>> Sorry it took me some time. Yes we have concerns we cannot go as proposed
>> and I don’t understand why PC doesn’t speak up!
>>
>> If we agree to propose this as is to the board it will come across as we
>> are aligned on what the priorities are and obviously they are not aligned
>> with us. To a board that is already either clueless about what the
>> noncommercials priorities are or doesn’t really want to consider them.
>>
>> I suggest this:
>>
>> A. Policy developments
>>
>>    1. Registration data (accuracy, contactibility, access, privacy, and
>>    transparency)
>>    2. DNS Abuse implementation, safeguards, and registrant and end users
>>    rights and access
>>    3. Registrant remedies and due process
>>    4. Human rights and privacy considerations in DNS policy across ICANN
>>
>> B. Strategic issues for the future of the DNS
>>
>>    1. AI and the future of Internet access, human rights in DNS policy
>>    2. Government intervention, fragmentation, accessibility, and impacts
>>    on the global DNS
>>    3. Emerging challenges affecting Internet users and the
>>    multistakeholder model
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 1:50 AM Rafik Dammak via NCSG-PC <
>> ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote:
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> any concerns with the proposed topics listed below?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> Le sam. 18 juil. 2026 à 06:38, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I really need feedback about the topics other we will go with what is
>>>> proposed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2026, 13:18 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> a reminder, any feedback/input regarding the board meeting agenda in
>>>>> day 0?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>> Le ven. 10 juil. 2026 à 08:05, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had a call with Mason who is chairing CSG for this turn and we
>>>>>> discussed Day 0 agenda and GNSO chair election.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For day 0, we agreed on a meeting with the board , asking to be at
>>>>>> the end of the day and to have a cocktail with them. In a more substantial
>>>>>> matter, they asked our feedback about this draft agenda for the meeting
>>>>>> with the board;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A.  State of the DNS from the Non-Contract Parties' view
>>>>>> 1. Accuracy of Registrant Data
>>>>>> 2. Access to Registration Data
>>>>>> 3. Registrar non-compliance with RDP
>>>>>> 4. DNS Abuse
>>>>>> B.  Future issues impacting the DNS
>>>>>> 1. Artificial Intelligence (from the NCPH perspective)
>>>>>> 2. ICANN structural review requirements
>>>>>> 3. Government intervention
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was clear that we are not necessarily supporting all those topics.
>>>>>> They want us to present as NCPH but share the different views from each
>>>>>> side. So the questions :
>>>>>> - what we want to keep, what we want to drop from above
>>>>>> - what we want to amend and change
>>>>>> - what we want to add instead
>>>>>> - what will be your idea for presenting those topics
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me know what you think and if you have any other suggestions for
>>>>>> the day 0 agenda. I suggested we can shape the day to discuss the topics we
>>>>>> want to share with the board and other admin topics like board seat 14.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding the second topic, for the GNSO chair election, CSG has a
>>>>>> candidate and is asking if we can nominate and support him for
>>>>>> election, knowing that CPH has 2 interested candidates. I made clear that
>>>>>> nomination and voting are 2 separate matters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The proposed candidate is Vivek and I said that we will have an
>>>>>> interview with him as we do like for any candidate. So we will schedule
>>>>>> that in the coming days.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On other hand, I brought concerns about the supposed "gentlemen
>>>>>> agreement" for alternance between CPH and NCPH as NCSG was never part of it
>>>>>> and neither got a NCSG chair. I want to discuss this with CSG and CPH as it
>>>>>> should be changed and formalized.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me know your thoughts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> 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/20260729/0c285f32/attachment.htm>