Dear All, Rationale is a general term Could someone kindly describe what does it mean or what is its scope of application in the context of ICANN by providing some practical example See also below Tom Dale [image: Pièces jointes]09:57 (Il y a 7 heures) À *Finn*, *Mark*, *Olga*, *Jorge.Cancio*, *Julia*, *Sabine.Meyer*, *Pedro*, *Suzanne*, *Alice*, *Pär*, *gac*, moi Dear All In any discussion of Advisory Committees (including GAC) providing a rationale for their advice, you may wish to note the GAC report to the Board of 8 May 2015 (here <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/schneider-to-crocker-08...>) in which the following response to a relevant ATRT2 Recommendation was provided: *ATRT2 Recommendation 6.3. *ATRT2 recommends that the Board work jointly with the GAC, through the BGRI, to facilitate the GAC developing and publishing rationales for GAC Advice at the time Advice is provided. Such rationales should be recorded in the GAC register. The register should also include a record of how the ICANN Board responded to each item of advice. *GAC Response*: Being Implemented. The rationale for GAC advice in Communiqués has been made clearer through continuous improvement of the wording of the Communiqué itself, including attachments where appropriate; holding of open meeting sessions as the default; and publication of transcripts and Minutes. The rationale for other GAC advice in the form of inter-sessional correspondence is made as clear as possible in the correspondence itself. The GAC Register of Advice could be made clearer and more accessible and this is being addressed. GAC Open Forums at face-to-face meetings are an opportunity for the community to seek further clarification from GAC on processes. The GAC will: · Continue working with ICANN staff to improve the GAC Register of Advice, including a record of how the ICANN Board responded to each item of advice. · Ensure that the GAC website review addresses the intent of this recommendation. · Consider further options for explaining its advice at face-to-face meetings and in writing. Regards Tom Dale ACIG GAC Secretariat 2016-01-18 17:17 GMT+01:00 Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org>:
Mathieu — Regarding formal advice from any Advisory Committee (AC), many commenters reiterated that a rationale should be a *requirement* for advice to be considered by the board. (BC, NPOC, Google, USCIB, RySG, Valideus, the US Chamber, RrSG, NCUC, I2C, Intel, IPC)
It’s not enough to require that each AC "will make every effort”.
From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> Date: Monday, January 18, 2016 at 3:10 AM To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>, Mike Chartier < mike.s.chartier@intel.com> Cc: "accountability-cross-community@icann.org" < accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
Mike,
Good catch indeed. Precisely the point of our first reading exercise.
So we will add this to recommendation 11 agenda item tomorrow.
I will note that the current annex includes a related recommendation :
· Insert a mention for all ACs: “The AC will make every effort to ensure that the advice provided is clear and supported by a rationale.”
Best,
Mathieu
*De :* accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] *De la part de* Greg Shatan *Envoyé :* lundi 18 janvier 2016 05:30 *À :* Chartier, Mike S *Cc :* accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Objet :* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
Mike,
Good point and good catch. This should not have been overlooked.
Greg
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Chartier, Mike S < mike.s.chartier@intel.com> wrote:
I think this is another illustration of how we need to be careful in documenting the process for handling comments (other than the Boards). For Recommendation 11 several commenters offered the proposal to add a requirement for GAC advice to be accompanied by a rationale. Given the general acceptance of proposals for rationales in other areas, I would have thought it would have at least been given a note in the prep document.
Look forward to discussing on Tues.
*From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Alice Jansen *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2016 12:01 PM *To:* accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
*Sent on behalf of CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs*
In preparation for your R*ecommendation 11 – GAC Advice (first reading)* discussion scheduled for your call #78 - Tuesday, 19 January 2016 (12:00 – 15:00 UTC) - please find attached the material to review.
Please use this email thread to circulate any comments you may have in advance of the call.
Thank you
Mathieu, Thomas, León
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community