Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #10 – 28 February 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/Y6bRAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux Multi-Stakeholder & Strategic Initiative Asst. ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: yvette.guigneaux@icann.org Cell: +1-310-460-8432 Skype: yvette.guigneaux.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> ________________________________ Notes Staff Accountability Meeting #10 28 February 2017 @ 05:00 UTC Agenda: 1. Intro: agenda review, attendance, SOI check 2. Second reading document A version 1.5. Jordan is rapporteur on this document If there is time after completing Document A for submission to Plenary (note the documents are open for comment and suggested edits. Contributions to content invited): 3. Discussion / seeking feedback on Draft Document B v1.2 Avri is rapporteur on this document 4. Continuing Discussion of Responses to Staff questions (if time) 5. Schedule check 6. AOB Notes (including relevant portions of the chat): 7 Participants at start of call Avri Doria - Usual administrivia - Pam Little - updated SOI, now representing Alibaba. Jordan Carter - (review of structure of document). Any comments? George Sadowsky - Difficult comments to make given my liaison status - My sense is of real concern because the document to my mind misses the mark completely. What problems are trying to be solved here - seems most clear. Limited Board feedback is there is no understanding what is going. You could cut out 80% of the document without losing much - the two main recommendations are F and J which seems to make sense. the document provides a lot of background, too much in many cases and some incorrect. Does this document really address the problem (statement from Rec. 12). Greg Shatan: I have the same general concerns as George has expressed. Jordan Carter - Agree just focusing on the problem would be better but this is not the requirement from Rec. 12. Greg Shatan - Do not think the suggestions made by GS are incoherent with Rec. 12. there may not be a need for a "history of the world" approach. Do not think this document is what was required by WS1. Jordan Carter - The italicized text is copy/paste from rec. 12 which says we should develop this in cooperation with staff - however there does not seem to be an operational model, given our attempts, that would allow us to do this. In part this is why I think this should go to the Plenary so we can get an understanding of what we should be doing. Avri Doria - Agree with JC comments and should be repeated to the plenary so we can find out if we are meeting the requirements of rec. 12. There does seem to be an (elephant) in the room but it is uncertain. avri doria: i actually did not say an elephant in the room. i said something large covered in a blanket walking through the room, but we don't know exactly what it is. Might be a rhinocerous for all I know. George Sadowsky - The elephant in the room seems to be people think that staff are crossing over the line to policy implementation and there is no place where the community can get that addressed. Jordan Carter - what I thought is that staff would provide a paper in June that would provide the information that was requested - but that was not the case. As a group of volunteers getting replies every two months does not seem to be very functional - GS How do we fix this so we can work with ICANN? George Sadowsky - My experience with staff is different - do not think staff is particularly hostile to this effort - and I apologize for not being there earlier in the process and am willing to help however I can at this point. Avri Doria - really think we should include this discussion in the document and send it to the plenary. I have made numerous requests to get staff participation to little avail and am not optimistic of participation going forward. Jordan Carter - Agree with AD - we need plenary input. Have no ownership issues with the document and have no issues with staff writing some of this. Avri Doria: Not perfectly comfortable with this approach. Need to send this document along with the cover note so we can have the wider discussion. Jordan Carter 2: I'm relaxed about including it, because if people don't read it, they won't have a sense of what is being pushed against or for George Sadowsky: Nothing wrong with that, Avri. Greg Shatan - In asking to frame this we have to consider if we want to ask the plenary to read 19 pages. Avri Doria - pertinent part of document is now only 11 pages. Jordan Carter - Agree this needs Framing to go to the plenary and that this conversation has helped verbalize some of my discomfort. We are not looking for any editorial comments from the Plenary. avri doria: we need to be careful not to whitewash in our zeal to be comfortable Greg Shatan: One last working note: we may want to let Board members generally know that they can participate on an equal footing with other participants, rather than feeling like they must only "liaise." Avri Doria – I have made that clear to GS a number of times. Jordan Carter - will draft a one page cover framing what we are asking the plenary and we will finish this on the Thursday meeting. George Sadowsky - More than willing to put in comments in the Googledoc but there seems to be too many comments. Avri Doria - that should work. Ok we have a plan. JC will produce a document in the next few hours which will be considered on our Thursday call. In the meantime people can finish cleaning up as much as they want. Jordan Carter 2: i'll circulate that cover note to the group in about 12h, or about 15h George Sadowsky: I will put all my comments on the GooglerDocs within 24 hours. Avri Doria - The specificity of the recommendations will be in the B document but needs the input from the A document. Any AOB (none). Adjourned.