April 2017 - Accountability-Cross-Community

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting # 28 | 25 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 25, 2017

April 25, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #28– 25 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/0c3RAw A copy of the action items and raw caption notes may be found below. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2BD9E.9169D400] Action Items * GS – to circulate a doodle poll to schedule a call of the questionnaire evaluation group. * GS – to circulate form for Litigation analysis to list * GS – To complete analysis of his two cases. * GS – Will complete the question on choice of law and send to the legal committee. Raw Captioning Notes · Word Doc <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64081361/0425ICAN0500UTC.d…> (Note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call) · PDF <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64081361/0425ICAN0500UTC.p…> (Note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call)

1 0

Request to continue funding the CCWG-Accountability -WS2 for FY18
by Bernard Turcotte April 21, 2017

April 21, 2017

Plenary, The following comment has been posted to the public consultation on ICANN's Draft FY18 Operating Plan and Budget, and Five-Year Operating Plan Update at - https://www.icann.org/public-comments/fy18-budget-2017-03-08-en as per the request of the plenary. The comment can be found at - http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-fy18-budget-08mar17/2017-April/00000… ============================================== Please accept the following comment on the FY18 budget on behalf of the CCWG-Accountability-WS2. The CCWG-Accountability-WS2 Co-Chairs Mathieu Weill, Thomas Rickert and Leon Sanchez.

1 0

[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-ICANN59-RequestForHighIntensitySessionV1.1BT
by Bernard Turcotte April 21, 2017

April 21, 2017

Co-Chairs, As requested and promised please fine a draft request for a WS2 high intensity session at ICANN59. Comments please. Cheers B.

2 2

Notes, recordings and transcript for Diversity Subgroup Meeting #19 | 20 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 21, 2017

April 21, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Diversity Subgroup Meeting #19 – 20 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/LNfRAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) [cid:image001.png@01D2BAA1.AE4BA620] Action Items: * Rafik Damak – Send a reminder to the group to read the draft proposal and make comments * Rafik Damak – send a reminder to the list that comments on the gender diversity questionnaire are due by Friday 28 April. * Ergys Rmaj – Amend gender diversity questionnaire per the accepted suggestions from the discussion Notes (including relevant portions of chat): 10 Participants at start of call. 1. Roll call 2. Review of action items * Rafik Dammak – Send a reminder to the group to read the draft proposal and make comments. Rafik Damak - TBC 3. Gender Diversity Survey Review Ergys Ramaj - (background and presentation of the draft survey document) Rafik Damak - is this just to gather information or do you think you will use this to make recommendations - trying to avoid duplication. Ergys Ramaj - the community has been calling for additional information on this so there can be an informed discussion on the topic. If useful we may use similar surveys on other areas of diversity - but mostly about gathering information. Avri Doria - Questions dealing with leadership - curious as it seems as long as someone is in any leadership position, even entry position in leadership, that there are no limitations to accessing leadership. Renata Aquino Ribeiro: The survey is lacking any question or perspective on young women. It is fundamental to measure this aspect as gender diversity is threatened greatly by power structures which ally w/ age and it also impacts on training and leadership perspectives. SuggestionWere you part of youth engagement programs? Yes/NoAre you a young participant and do you feel that this has an impact on gender and leadership? Mostrar menos Ergys Ramaj - we are trying to measure perception. Will be modifying to questionnaire wrt this. avri doria: thanks - had not gone back to the doc after commenting Julie Hammer - Survey could be confusing to people who are not following our work of that of the CCWG-Acct. and as such could be confused with our work. Should be clear in the introduction that this is ICANN staff doing this for the community and that the results will be shared with us. Ergys Ramaj - will do. Sebastien Bachollet - a little confused this survey seems to be more about EQUALITY vs DIVERSITY. We need equality one man for one woman. Ergys Ramaj - sometimes questions on gender go to equality but it should not be binary - its about gender diversity. Rafik Damak - We have had this discussion before. avri doria: i hope we do not start using a transgender as an excuse for lack of parity. that would be too cynical by half. Sebastien Bachollet - Agree with comment by AD. We are not yet with equlity yet we want to go further than that - I am just suggesting that we first have equality between men and women as a first step without stopping the work there - but just this would be a very important step. Avri Doria - this was not my meeting - very ok to deal with transgenders for us. It is good that we are doing this but to use it to not understand a lack of parity. Rafik Damak - can we clarify between Parity and Equality. Avri Doria - Equality gets to be confusing and is used in many ways - people get treated equally - looking at a Board over a 10 year span then men and women would be about the same numbers. fuzzy notion . renata aquino Ribeiro - Just wondering about the age perspective. should look at age and gender diversity as this is very important in the survey. Ergys Ramaj - Are you asking we include a question about age? Renata Aquino Ribeiro: yes, about young women participants in the community Renata Aquino Ribeiro: and how gender impacts that participation (many sub-questions regarding youth leadership training). Ergys Ramaj - would need to define Youth if we go there which is another dimension of diversity so this would be hard given the survey is not only for women - also the exit survey questions deal with this in part. Renata Aquino Ribeiro: Understand but understanding young woman participating in the community. So this is important - not looking at this would leave out important data and would help align this with how power structures. Ergys Ramaj - would defer to the group. We could cover this in further surveys when dealing with age. question 5 does deal with age. Renata Aquino Ribeiro- this survey has to properly identify issues. Identification as a minority group in the survey - there could be elements of diversity which could be explored. Avri Doria - how can we include these points in the survey - in the clearance question you could expand a bit to get more information. could also include one on other forms of diversity. Re question about barriers - you include more things. avri doria: just not sure all of the age and origin should be optonal. renata aquino: +1 on race too Nadira AlAraj: +1 to include the different demographic diversity questions to do coronatio Rafik Damak - Good suggestions and we can add comments in the Google doc for this. When are you planning to finalize this survey. Ergys Ramaj - AD very useful - on timing we would appreciate if comments could be in by then end of next week. Looking to have a full report in late June or early July. Rafik Damak - Action Item will send a reminder to the list. avri doria: a lot of the questions are in the optional exit survey but some should be brougght into the main part of the q for relation and correlation analyisis 4. Draft Report Discussion https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l2cGcx8nNvYSg_ZMUVnoC2t0VKb4ATQVTXxcxYI… (no time for this item) 5. AOB (none) Adjourned. Decisions: none

2 1

Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #15_ 21 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 21, 2017

April 21, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #15 – 21 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/DtLRAw A copy of the action item and live caption notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2BA9F.6098D1C0] Action Items * Jordan will initiate a discussion on the email list regarding a process for discussion, analysis and development of “solutions” to the “issues” Raw Caption Notes * Word Doc <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64082446/Staff%20Acct%20Ra…> (Note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call) * PDF<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64082446/Staff%20Acct%20Ra…> (Note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call)

1 0

CCWG ACCT Plenary Calendar Invite issue
by MSSI Secretariat April 20, 2017

April 20, 2017

Dear all, My apology for multiple calendar invites/cancellations. Obviously, I was having Outlook issue. Please see the “accurate” upcoming calendar invites for the following dates for the CCWG Accountability Plenary meetings. These are also listed on the wiki page here<https://community.icann.org/x/FCOOAw>. · 26 April @ 05:00 UTC (invite sent a few weeks ago) · 10 May @ 13:00 UTC (sending invite today) · 24 May @ 19:00 UTC (sending invite today) Thank you for your understanding!! With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2B9CD.3A73AF60]

1 0

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-hr] Letter from the Board on Human Rights
by Seun Ojedeji April 20, 2017

April 20, 2017

That's right, I wanted to know what/who Board meant when they mention "ICANN organisation" I thought it was staff as it made sense to me if such impact assessment were formerly conducted by staff to better inform the Board and the community on implementation implications However based on Niel's message it seem it's referring to the community which is all clear now. Regards On Apr 13, 2017 19:40, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> wrote: > This seems reasonable. Seun had noted he thought the Board letter > indicated they were asking staff to do something. Seun observed that when > the Board says “ICANN organization”, it means staff. > > Anne > > > > *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese* > > Of Counsel > > 520.629.4428 office > > 520.879.4725 fax > > AAikman(a)lrrc.com > > _____________________________ > > Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP > > One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 > > Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 > > lrrc.com > > > > *From:* ws2-hr-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] *On > Behalf Of *Greg Shatan > *Sent:* Thursday, April 13, 2017 9:06 AM > *To:* McAuley, David > *Cc:* accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org; ws2-hr(a)icann.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-hr] Letter from the Board on Human Rights > > > > I agree with Niels and David. > > > > Greg > > > > *Greg Shatan *C: 917-816-6428 > S: gsshatan > Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428 > gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com > > > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:58 AM, McAuley, David via Ws2-hr < > ws2-hr(a)icann.org> wrote: > > This seems like a good approach Niels, thank you. > > Best regards, > David > > David McAuley > International Policy Manager > Verisign Inc. > 703-948-4154 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ws2-hr-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] On > Behalf Of Niels ten Oever > Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 11:52 AM > To: Remmy Nweke <remmyn(a)gmail.com> > Cc: ws2-hr(a)icann.org; accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-hr] Letter from the Board on Human Rights > > Dear all, > > A board member confirmed to me that the Considerations document was not > considered when this letter was composed and that the Public Comment period > is probably the best moment for the board to give input this. > > I would propose that the CCWG co-chairs and I will respond with a letter > to the board that it seems we have addressed most issues with the FoI and > Considerations document and that we would like to invite the board to > continue to provide input via discussions in the plenary, the subgroup and > during the upcoming public comments period for this document. > > Best, > > Niels > > On 04/13/2017 12:06 AM, Remmy Nweke wrote: > > Definitely this letter is not for this group. > > > > Like Niels noted, we may wait until the public comment to get more > > information from the Board on this and remain focused on the current > > assignment. > > > > Regards > > Remmy > > > > ____ > > REMMY NWEKE, mNGE, > > Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor, DigitalSENSE Africa Media > > [/Multiple-award winning medium/] (DigitalSENSE Business News > > <http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng/businessnews>; ITREALMS > > <http://www.itrealms.com.ng>, NaijaAgroNet > > <http://www.naijaagronet.com.ng>) Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin > > Plaza, Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos > > M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, T: @ITRealms > > <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms> > > Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria > > <https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria‎> > > PC Summit 2017 <http://www.pcsummit.com.ng>, December 7-8 @Federal > > Palace, Victoria Island, Lagos. > > > > *Vice President, African Civil Society on the Information Society > > (ACSIS > > <http://www.acsis-scasi.org/en/>) > > _________________________________________________________________ > > *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and > > attachments are confidential and may also be privileged information. > > It is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke > > does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. > > If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me immediately, > > then delete this document and do not disclose the contents of this > > document to any other person, nor make any copies. Violators may face > > court persecution. > > > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Niels ten Oever > > <lists(a)nielstenoever.net <mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net>> wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > I am forwarding you a letter that I and the CCWG co-chairs received > from > > the board, please find it attached. > > > > It seems like this letter was composed before the Considerations > > document was finalized, therefore I think it would be apt that we > > continue with our readings and ask the board to provide us with their > > analysis during the Public Comments period. > > > > All the best, > > > > Niels > > > > -- > > Niels ten Oever > > Head of Digital > > > > Article 19 > > www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org> > > > > PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 > > 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ws2-hr mailing list > > Ws2-hr(a)icann.org <mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr > > <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr> > > > > > > -- > Niels ten Oever > Head of Digital > > Article 19 > www.article19.org > > PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 > 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 ______________________________ > _________________ > > Ws2-hr mailing list > Ws2-hr(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-hr mailing list > Ws2-hr(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr > > > > ------------------------------ > > This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the > individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this > message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or > agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended > recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or > copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you > have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by > replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any > attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and > confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the > Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-hr mailing list > Ws2-hr(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr > >

11 13

CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Plenary20170426-AgendaV1.0BT
by Bernard Turcotte April 19, 2017

April 19, 2017

All, Please find below the agenda for our next CCWG-Accountability plenary to be held on Wednesday 26 April 0500UTC. Also please note that the contractor conducting the evaluation of the office of the Ombudsman currently has a web questionnaire seeking input for their work. The announcement can be found at *https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2017-04-10-en <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2017-04-10-en>* while the survey itself can be found at http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/3462816/ICANN and is available in all ICANN official languages. We would encourage to complete the survey if you ever interacted with ICANN's Office of the Ombudsman or if you have thoughts on areas for improvement. *CCWG-Accountability Plenary Wednesday 26 April 0500UTC* Adobe Room - https://participate.icann.org/accountability <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fparticipate.icann.org%2Faccounta…> 1. Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior 2. Review of Agenda 3. Administration 3.1. Review of Action Items from previous meeting: 3.1.1. Greg Shatan – Provide next update on this at the 21 June plenary. 3.1.2. Staff - prepare draft to submit comment to FY18 OP&B and notice to chartering organizations*. *(TBC) 3.2. Distribution of Diversity Questionnaire 3.3. Interpretation for Diversity sub-group calls 3.4. Update on captioning 3.5. Update on Jurisdiction questionnaire 3.6. Update on Transparency public consultation. 3.7. Update on Guidelines for Good Faith public consultation 3.8. Update on SOAC Accountability public consultation 4. Legal Committee Update 4.1. No pending requests 5. Updates/Presentation from sub-groups 5.1.1. Second Reading of the Human Rights "Considerations" (please note that the first part of the document is the HR Framework of Interpretation which was approved by the plenary previously. The new section "Considerations" begins on page 5 of the document and is what is being considered for a first reading). - Attached 5.1.2. Staff Accountability – document for input and guidance (not requesting a first reading) – attached. 6. Next Plenary - Wednesday 10 May 1300UTC 7. AOB 8. Adjournment

1 0

Notes, recordings and transcript for WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting # 27 | 18 April 2017
by MSSI Secretariat April 19, 2017

April 19, 2017

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #27– 18 April 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/zs3RAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2B90A.5F4366F0] Action Items: · Staff – Get responses to questionnaire which are not in English translated to English. · Greg Shatan – (Re Employ media case analysis) Draft a request to ICANN Legal as to why there is no choice of law in the registry agreements. · Greg Shatan – Place work plan in Google Docs and post link to group to facilitate commenting. · Greg Shatan – post update to list on Review of ICANN Litigations noting which cases are due by who and which cases still need people to review. Notes (including relevant portions of chat): 16 participants at start of call 1. Welcome 2. Review of Agenda (2 minutes) Greg Shatan - (none) 3. Administration (1 minute) 3.1. Changes to SOIs Greg Shatan - Any changes (none). 3.2. Identify Audio Only and Phone Number Participants Greg Shatan - Any audio only? (none) 4. Review of decisions and action items from last call (2 minutes) 4.1. Decisions – none 4.2. Action Items: 4.2.1. To review work plan presentation for plenary per comments (Greg) Greg Shatan - this was done and emailed and presented to the plenary. 4.2.2. Questionnaire Review Team – Review latest submissions Greg Shatan - No meeting of this group yet. An email has been sent to the QRT email list with a proposed process. 4.2.3. Will post to list to encourage discussion of the latest case analysis (Greg) Greg Shatan - completed. 5. Update on Questionnaire (10 minutes) 5.1. Questionnaire closed April 17, 2017 Kavouss Arasteh - should cut off as of this meeting. Greg Shatan - chat seems to indicate preference for Friday 23:59UTC (DECISION). need staff to advise when translations will be available (ACTION ITEM). Note that there are more than a dozen open comments currently. avri doria: it isn't just holidays, it is the massive number for open comments. avri doria: same thing happened at NCSG call this morning Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): I just note that apparently we have little feedback from registries and registrars (or their constituencies)... 6. Review of ICANN Litigations (15 minutes) 6.1. Name.Space, Inc. v. ICANN. – DM David McAuley - Interesting case but very little impact on Jurisdiction. (presenting case analysis). Milton Mueller - want to emphasize - the original lawsuit from NSI in the late 90's is why the USG asserted control over the Root to avoid the anti-trust issues. ICANN could still be sued for monopolization if it could be proved it colluded for this but this was by design and the fact it is US jurisdiction makes little difference. Phil Corwin - question for DM - if this case were brought today would it also be dismissed? David McAuley - Hard to say - it could of been a little easier for NSI to make the monopolization case - but uncertain they would of gotten any further. Kavouss Arasteh: Milton, Is really ICANN able to do this type of monopolization after transition avri doria: i think until it is challenged, it is difficult to call it definitely. Depends on how they interpret the NTIA grant to ICANN when it turned everything over. Milton Mueller: there is no NTIA grant to ICANN Greg Shatan - re anti-trust immunity or a state actor were not considered by the court - the contract with the USG was the main consideration. avri doria: Milton, i will be interested to see how future cases argue it and how it is treated. Milton Mueller: Kavouss: if ICANN passed a policy that was proposed by registrars and registries that substantially restricted competition in the domain name market it could be sued on antitrust grounds David McAuley (RySG): The "no amendment would cure language by the court is also interesting Erich Schweighofer: Does that mean that ICANN is subject to control of monopolisation, e.g. abuse of a dominant market position. David McAuley (RySG): I cannot answer that one Erich 6.2. Employ Media LLC v ICANN - RBL Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix - (presenting case analysis) Milton Mueller: What was the settlement, Raphael? Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix - who would be able to register for .jobs. Milton Mueller: Who caved ? ICANN or .JOBs? Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): what could be the reasons for not specifying the applicable law? Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix - not specified in the documentation. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): nobody does such a thing without a reason... Milton Mueller: right Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): (being a well-advised corporation) Greg Shatan - ACTION ITEM - Ask ICANN applicable is not specified - Anyone interested in drafting? if not I will.why Kavouss Arasteh - why was this not included - there must be a reason? Greg Shatan - any further questions? 7. Questions to ICANN Legal: Follow-Up (10 minutes) 7.1. Further questions and next steps Greg Shatan - Sam Eisner was on the plenary call - if participants missed that they are encouraged to read the transcript or listen to the recording. Any further points on this except the question from the previous point? (none). Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): and I guess others may pop-up as we discuss 8. Draft Work Plan and Schedule: Follow-Up (10 minutes) 8.1. Comments or Questions on Current Draft (revised after Subgroup meeting and circulated to Plenary) Greg Shatan - Encourage all comments on the plan - this is our plan so please comment. ACTION ITEM GS - will put it up as a GoogleDoc. to facilitate comments. Would like to remind everyone we should only look for remedies to issues that are identified. David McAuley (RySG): That would be welcome Greg Greg Shatan - would note there are some cases that have not been claimed for analysis - and would encourage people to claim those and those that have claimed but not completed to please complete these (ACTION ITEM). Would be nice to have something for ICANN 59. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): aim for that...yes Kavouss Arasteh - will this work plan actually get us somewhere? Greg Shatan – This is my hope but this is our workplan – so up to us to decide. David McAuley (RySG): our return to scope discussion will be important in this respect 9. AOB (none) 10. Next meeting 25 April 05:00 UTC 11. Adjourned

1 0

Call for input - Staff Accountability issues list
by Jordan Carter April 18, 2017

April 18, 2017

Dear CCWG participants, The Staff Accountability subgroup has been following the changed approach to our work we agreed together in Copenhagen at ICANN 58. We now need some input from you, and we hope you can offer some thoughts. This is *not* a First Reading request, it is a request for you to share some experience you may or may not have with us over the next week or so. In dealing with the staff accountability subject, we are in a "problem identification" phase. We are trying to understand and log the challenges or concerns people have with staff accountability matters. With each issue identified, we are identifying CONTRIBUTIONS to that issue (i.e. what is making it an issue / problem); and IMPACTS of that issue (what are the consequences of the issue, what effect does it have on the ICANN system?). Once we know the set of issues, we'll start working on ways to solve them. But being clear about the issues or problems is the first step, and where we are now. *Please review the table attached (.pdf or .docx), or in Google docs, at *< https://docs.google.com/document/d/12ihFgBE5lcVTfiL6wft9MsOqHaSSK nzIDd1utROosNU/edit?usp=sharing> We would welcome your feedback on these particular points: 1. Are the issues identified so far issues which seem general, or are they based (to your knowledge) on one-off circumstances? [we should only try and solve systemic or recurring issues, not one-offs] 2. Are there issues not on the list that we should be thinking about? (If so, please add them as tracked changes in the google doc) 3. Are there other contributions to the issues in the list, or impacts from the issues, that you can add to make the table richer and more accurate? (if so, please add them as tracked changes in the google doc) Thanks for sharing your thinking with us over the next week or so. *It would be most helpful if you could add your thoughts in the Google doc rather than by email on the list. * Avri Doria, Jordan Carter Co-Rapporteurs, Staff Accountability, CCWG

2 2