Dear Mathieu, I would like to highlight the comments Fiona, Izumi and I have done with regards to the definition document in a previous email to you and at the Frankfurt meeting: --------------- Section 3.a.i. --------------- It would be very helpful to have some clarification with regards to the terms "affected by contract", "affected by individual decisions" and "affected by policy" as they appear in the table. It is our understanding that these terms refer to decisions made by ICANN, as indicated in the introduction above the table. In this case we would like to note that (with regards to numbers): - the _directly_ affected parties are the RIRs and not the RIR communities. The RIR communities are affected indirectly. Therefore we would suggest removing "and RIR communities" from the "stakeholders" column. (Also the slides need to be updated accordingly) - RIRs are directly "affected by individual decisions" of the Board. The ICANN board does not create global RIR policies, and global RIR policies are not considered to be ICANN policies. The Board may either ratify or reject the global RIR policies as created and approved by the RIR communities, which we consider to be an "individual decision". Therefore we would suggest removing the "X" from the column under "affected by policy". --------------- Section 3.a.ii. --------------- Following the remark made above about RIR communities not being directly affected by ICANN decisions, we would suggest adding "RIR communities" to the list of indirectly- affected parties. ================= If you have any questions please let us know. Thank you very much for your good work and your attention. Athina On 13/01/15 06:51, Athina Fragkouli wrote:
Dear Mathieu,
First of all many compliments to the co-Chairs for your initiative to provide the group with this document. This is very helpful.
Please find below two comments Izumi and I have on the document:
- With regards to the list of indirectly affected parties by ICANN's decisions (section 2.a.ii) we would add "RIR communities"
- In the list of parties affecting ICANN directly (2.b.i) it is noted: "RIRs (through ASO)". As the ASO is not representing the RIRs but rather the RIRs communities, we would ask this to be modified accordingly: "RIR communities (through ASO)"
Looking forward to our call tomorrow.
Kind regards, Athina Fragkouli
On 12/01/15 18:53, Mathieu Weill wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
In anticipation of the call tomorrow, please find an updated version of the draft document mentioned below.
Main edits include : - alternate proposal to capture the discussion around purpose of accountability during last week's call - various comments from Kavouss - other minor edits following feedbacks received off list
Best, Mathieu PS: edits are apparent in this version
Le 05/01/2015 16:44, Mathieu Weill a écrit :
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached a document drafted by the co-Chairs intended to provide baseline definitions for our work. It is designed to address some of the early questions we raised such as to whom should Icann be accountable ? What is the purpose of Icann's accountability ? or what is accountability ?
We provide the document for your reading before the meeting but I will introduce the document during our call tomorrow, and comments will be welcome during the call or after on this email thread.
We are well aware of the importance of the choice of words in the definitions and of their consequences for guiding the work of our group going forward. This document is a strawman, so feedback in the form of proposed edits will be much appreciated.
Best,
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community