New topics / concerns - initiating discussions
Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL
Hi Mathieu, Many thanks for your email and the one pagers. I have glanced through the documents and noticed the need for a governance framework (in broad terms) that satisfies the needs of the evolving ICANN community. It would be interesting to look at some ideas that are acceptable under the Californian Law from those familiar with the jurisdiction. Regards On 6/22/15, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/
Mathieu I wonder whether some of these issue is implementable? For instance GAC is composed of representatives of Governments. Each member of GAC ,in person, is accountable to his or her Government . In other area I suspect whether or not you intend to open a Pandora Box? Staff are accountable to Board and CEO we could not make staff accoiuntable to the community since we break the chain of hierarchy I do not know what we are doing Do you have months of time and tens of Calls and and ... Not all comments could be implementable. Pls review the topics We need to merely address the those items which are valid ,in particular, how to implement the empowerment and enforcement and few other things Kavouss 2015-06-23 0:11 GMT+02:00 Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>:
Hi Mathieu,
Many thanks for your email and the one pagers. I have glanced through the documents and noticed the need for a governance framework (in broad terms) that satisfies the needs of the evolving ICANN community. It would be interesting to look at some ideas that are acceptable under the Californian Law from those familiar with the jurisdiction.
Regards
On 6/22/15, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/ _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear Kavouss, In light of the comments received, our group needs to decide how to respond to the various topics. As you rightly point out, some items we might not be able to address in WS1, maybe not even in WS2. But we need to discuss it as a group and that is the point of lauching the discussion. Best Mathieu Le 22/06/2015 21:05, Kavouss Arasteh a écrit :
Mathieu I wonder whether some of these issue is implementable? For instance GAC is composed of representatives of Governments. Each member of GAC ,in person, is accountable to his or her Government . In other area I suspect whether or not you intend to open a Pandora Box? Staff are accountable to Board and CEO we could not make staff accoiuntable to the community since we break the chain of hierarchy I do not know what we are doing Do you have months of time and tens of Calls and and ... Not all comments could be implementable. Pls review the topics We need to merely address the those items which are valid ,in particular, how to implement the empowerment and enforcement and few other things Kavouss
2015-06-23 0:11 GMT+02:00 Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack@gmail.com <mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com>>:
Hi Mathieu,
Many thanks for your email and the one pagers. I have glanced through the documents and noticed the need for a governance framework (in broad terms) that satisfies the needs of the evolving ICANN community. It would be interesting to look at some ideas that are acceptable under the Californian Law from those familiar with the jurisdiction.
Regards
On 6/22/15, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: > Dear Colleagues, > > As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of > the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we > should address several topics : > - staff accountability culture > - Board duties and roles > - enhancing diversity > - enhancing SO/AC accountability > > In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled > one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on > comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that > were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no > way reflect any "position" on the matters. > > It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics > In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an > appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted > Jordan already did on another thread. > > Best regards, > > -- > Mathieu WEILL > >
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/ _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
Dear Barrack, Thank you for your response. Could you elaborate on what you call a governance framework ? I personally am unsure what that refers to. Best Mathieu Le 22/06/2015 19:11, Barrack Otieno a écrit :
Hi Mathieu,
Many thanks for your email and the one pagers. I have glanced through the documents and noticed the need for a governance framework (in broad terms) that satisfies the needs of the evolving ICANN community. It would be interesting to look at some ideas that are acceptable under the Californian Law from those familiar with the jurisdiction.
Regards
On 6/22/15, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
Hi Mathieu, Many thanks, by governance framework i meant structures that facilitate interaction between various stakeholders in the organization with the objective of delivering results whilst ensuring that there is accountability. There are different approaches for the corporate and not for profit /public benefit sectors considering voluntary engagement of stakeholders in the later which is why i asked if there is any framework we can ascribe to On 6/23/15, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Barrack,
Thank you for your response. Could you elaborate on what you call a governance framework ? I personally am unsure what that refers to.
Best Mathieu
Le 22/06/2015 19:11, Barrack Otieno a écrit :
Hi Mathieu,
Many thanks for your email and the one pagers. I have glanced through the documents and noticed the need for a governance framework (in broad terms) that satisfies the needs of the evolving ICANN community. It would be interesting to look at some ideas that are acceptable under the Californian Law from those familiar with the jurisdiction.
Regards
On 6/22/15, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/
Mathieu, Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders. These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points. Greg On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance. Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline. Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process. That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think. el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote: Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL [...]
Mathieu Tks for reply Yes no problem to discuss briefly but not embark on that Regards Kavouss 2015-06-23 11:41 GMT+02:00 Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na>:
Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance.
Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline.
Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process.
That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think.
el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
[...]
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Eberhard, As we have all heard, the Board will approve the FOI this week, which will govern the manner in which RFC 1591 is to be applied by IANA. If in the future IANA fails to follow RFC 1591 as interpreted by the FOI, the affected ccTLD manager could challenge that action as a breach of ICANN’s obligation to follow existing policy. Of course, every ccTLD manager has whatever additional rights it has, and no one proposes to constrain those. So, other than (a) the FOI safeguards that are about to be adopted and (b) your request for legal work to understand whether or not the USG has the right to manage IANA in the first place and to transfer that authority in the second place, what do you want? Could you please be concrete? I have the greatest respect for your substantive views, but I am honestly unclear about what you are after. Becky J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006 Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz From: Eberhard Lisse <el@lisse.na<mailto:el@lisse.na>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 6:41 AM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: "directors@omadhina.net<mailto:directors@omadhina.net>" <directors@omadhina.net<mailto:directors@omadhina.net>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New topics / concerns - initiating discussions Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance. Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline. Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process. That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think. el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Mathieu, Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders. These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points. Greg On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL [...]
Dear Becky, I expect that redelegation also will be in accordance with the GAC principles as well as national legislation on redelegation. Best, Finn Sendt fra min iPad Den 23/06/2015 kl. 14.03 skrev Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz<mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>>: Eberhard, As we have all heard, the Board will approve the FOI this week, which will govern the manner in which RFC 1591 is to be applied by IANA. If in the future IANA fails to follow RFC 1591 as interpreted by the FOI, the affected ccTLD manager could challenge that action as a breach of ICANN’s obligation to follow existing policy. Of course, every ccTLD manager has whatever additional rights it has, and no one proposes to constrain those. So, other than (a) the FOI safeguards that are about to be adopted and (b) your request for legal work to understand whether or not the USG has the right to manage IANA in the first place and to transfer that authority in the second place, what do you want? Could you please be concrete? I have the greatest respect for your substantive views, but I am honestly unclear about what you are after. Becky J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006 Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz> From: Eberhard Lisse <el@lisse.na<mailto:el@lisse.na>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 6:41 AM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: "directors@omadhina.net<mailto:directors@omadhina.net>" <directors@omadhina.net<mailto:directors@omadhina.net>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New topics / concerns - initiating discussions Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance. Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline. Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process. That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think. el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Mathieu, Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders. These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points. Greg On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL [...] _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
There you go, Becky. And you wonder why I am concerned? el On 2015-06-23 14:23 , Finn Petersen wrote:
Dear Becky,
I expect that redelegation also will be in accordance with the GAC principles as well as national legislation on redelegation.
Best,
Finn
Sendt fra min iPad
Den 23/06/2015 kl. 14.03 skrev Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz <mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>>:
Eberhard,
As we have all heard, the Board will approve the FOI this week, which will govern the manner in which RFC 1591 is to be applied by IANA. If in the future IANA fails to follow RFC 1591 as interpreted by the FOI, the affected ccTLD manager could challenge that action as a breach of ICANN’s obligation to follow existing policy. Of course, every ccTLD manager has whatever additional rights it has, and no one proposes to constrain those.
So, other than (a) the FOI safeguards that are about to be adopted and (b) your request for legal work to understand whether or not the USG has the right to manage IANA in the first place and to transfer that authority in the second place, what do you want? Could you please be concrete? I have the greatest respect for your substantive views, but I am honestly unclear about what you are after.
Becky
J. Beckwith Burr
*Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz <mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz <http://www.neustar.biz>
From: Eberhard Lisse <el@lisse.na <mailto:el@lisse.na>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 6:41 AM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: "directors@omadhina.net <mailto:directors@omadhina.net>" <directors@omadhina.net <mailto:directors@omadhina.net>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New topics / concerns - initiating discussions
Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance.
Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline.
Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process.
That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think.
el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
[...] _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Finn, With specific reference to the GAC principles may I respectfully refer you to Clause 1.3 of the preamble…. These principles are intended as a guide to the relationships between Governments, their ccTLD and ICANN. They are not intended to be binding and need both Governments and Registries voluntarily to agree to apply them within their legal framework. If either the Government or the Registry decide not to adopt the principles, this cannot be held against the Registry, and the Registry still has a valid existence. Cheers, Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> | W: www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator Important Notice - This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
On 24 Jun 2015, at 03:23 , Finn Petersen <FinPet@erst.dk> wrote:
Dear Becky,
I expect that redelegation also will be in accordance with the GAC principles as well as national legislation on redelegation.
Best,
Finn
Sendt fra min iPad
Den 23/06/2015 kl. 14.03 skrev Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz <mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>>:
Eberhard,
As we have all heard, the Board will approve the FOI this week, which will govern the manner in which RFC 1591 is to be applied by IANA. If in the future IANA fails to follow RFC 1591 as interpreted by the FOI, the affected ccTLD manager could challenge that action as a breach of ICANN’s obligation to follow existing policy. Of course, every ccTLD manager has whatever additional rights it has, and no one proposes to constrain those.
So, other than (a) the FOI safeguards that are about to be adopted and (b) your request for legal work to understand whether or not the USG has the right to manage IANA in the first place and to transfer that authority in the second place, what do you want? Could you please be concrete? I have the greatest respect for your substantive views, but I am honestly unclear about what you are after.
Becky
J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006 Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz <mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz <http://www.neustar.biz/>
From: Eberhard Lisse <el@lisse.na <mailto:el@lisse.na>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 6:41 AM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: "directors@omadhina.net <mailto:directors@omadhina.net>" <directors@omadhina.net <mailto:directors@omadhina.net>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New topics / concerns - initiating discussions
Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance.
Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline.
Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process.
That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think.
el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL [...]
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community <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
Chris, Thx for reminding me of Clause 1.3. Best, Finn Sendt fra min iPad Den 23/06/2015 kl. 15.03 skrev Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au<mailto:ceo@auda.org.au>>: Finn, With specific reference to the GAC principles may I respectfully refer you to Clause 1.3 of the preamble…. These principles are intended as a guide to the relationships between Governments, their ccTLD and ICANN. They are not intended to be binding and need both Governments and Registries voluntarily to agree to apply them within their legal framework. If either the Government or the Registry decide not to adopt the principles, this cannot be held against the Registry, and the Registry still has a valid existence. Cheers, Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au<mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> | W: www.auda.org.au<http://www.auda.org.au/> auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator Important Notice - This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email. On 24 Jun 2015, at 03:23 , Finn Petersen <FinPet@erst.dk<mailto:FinPet@erst.dk>> wrote: Dear Becky, I expect that redelegation also will be in accordance with the GAC principles as well as national legislation on redelegation. Best, Finn Sendt fra min iPad Den 23/06/2015 kl. 14.03 skrev Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz<mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>>: Eberhard, As we have all heard, the Board will approve the FOI this week, which will govern the manner in which RFC 1591 is to be applied by IANA. If in the future IANA fails to follow RFC 1591 as interpreted by the FOI, the affected ccTLD manager could challenge that action as a breach of ICANN’s obligation to follow existing policy. Of course, every ccTLD manager has whatever additional rights it has, and no one proposes to constrain those. So, other than (a) the FOI safeguards that are about to be adopted and (b) your request for legal work to understand whether or not the USG has the right to manage IANA in the first place and to transfer that authority in the second place, what do you want? Could you please be concrete? I have the greatest respect for your substantive views, but I am honestly unclear about what you are after. Becky J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006 Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> From: Eberhard Lisse <el@lisse.na<mailto:el@lisse.na>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 6:41 AM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: "directors@omadhina.net<mailto:directors@omadhina.net>" <directors@omadhina.net<mailto:directors@omadhina.net>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New topics / concerns - initiating discussions Not an original attempt at all, call "Interesting" but not deal with the substance. Even if we assumed that we could compel ICANN to do our bidding after they got what they want, which as past behavior is a good indicator for future behavior, I am not convinced we will, I remain not in agreement with putting something in just so we can make the deadline. Or because the Intellectual Property community and other big commercial interests can fund lobbyists, this particular one not even being a chartered member, to try and drive the process. That ICANN is so enthusiastic with this should make one think. el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini On Jun 23, 2015, at 00:53, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Mathieu, Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders. These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points. Greg On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL [...] _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
+1 Greg. On 6/23/2015 12:53 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto: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
-- Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 (0)771 247 2987
Mathieu We need to be mindful to respect the hierarchy function between ICANN Board and ICANN CEO and the staff Pls kindly read my comments on the risk in breaking the hierarchy link Regards Kavouss 2015-06-23 14:47 GMT+02:00 Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org>:
+1 Greg.
On 6/23/2015 12:53 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing listAccountability-Cross-Community@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)+ 44 (0)771 247 2987
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Mathieu and co-chairs, excellent potential points on the concern of increasing diversity. On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Mathieu We need to be mindful to respect the hierarchy function between ICANN Board and ICANN CEO and the staff Pls kindly read my comments on the risk in breaking the hierarchy link Regards Kavouss
2015-06-23 14:47 GMT+02:00 Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org>:
+1 Greg.
On 6/23/2015 12:53 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
Mathieu,
Thank you for these. While these are interesting issues, I think that our first priority should be discussing and refining the Empowered SO/AC Proposal. This is the primary hurdle to a proposal that is likely to satisfy a broad spectrum of stakeholders.
These will be interesting discussion topics, and may be great Work Stream 2 subjects, but we have ask what we need to resolve so that Work Stream 1 and thus our Proposal work. If there is time, we can then discuss these points.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing listAccountability-Cross-Community@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)+ 44 (0)771 247 2987
_______________________________________________ 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
-- - @arunmsukumar <http://www.twitter.com/arunmsukumar> Senior Fellow, Centre for Communication Governance <http://www.ccgdelhi.org> National Law University, New Delhi Ph: +91-9871943272
Dear Mathieu, Thank you for the one pagers, I don´t know how the CCWG is going to collect reactions to the one pagers. But here are my initial reactions on two of them, as they are close to my own comments to the initial draft. 1. I have something to add to the internal accountability in the corporation which is not reflected in the one pager. I want to refer to the recommendations of the ATRT2 regarding the revision procedures. The present procedures have been regularly dented, because it is difficult to argue when there is a a staff vs. a Board action/inaction to object. The final decision on the revision process is controlled by staff. Furthermore, there is even less scope in the revision process to have transparency about the arms length separation of staff action/inaction between the different steps of the activities of the corporation (i.e. policy development -normally related to the GNSO Council-, policy implementation -normally related to GDD- and contract compliance). As I commented to the initial draft, there is little on the Revision process and even less on its direct inter-relation to the ITP. I can hardly think that a global concept like “accountability culture” will cover all bases for this very specific accountability issues. Either this is a new additional block, or I can hardly see any chance for a fruitful discussion under the present time limitations. 2. The challenge for a common standard of accountability for the whole community is not only part of the “road ahead” section of the Net Mundial statement in general terms, but is also present in the varied definitions of consensus that we have ween in the CCWG but did not make it to the draft, as well as the standards for SOI that the present PDP on the framework for Cross Community Working groups, as presently under discussion. Again the respective one pager is obvious to all this background. 3. I have not read the other two one pagers but if they are as general as the first two, I don´t understand how the CCWG will move forward on those relevant issues. Do you have any suggestion like small subgroups that would drill deeper on them and look for the meat of the issue? Is there a chance to add one or two more blocks to the initial 4 ones? there are some other hints in the Sunday evening address by Larry Strickling, in terms of the relevance of certain issues towards the standards set by the NTIA that should help address this new list of issues in a more effective way. Look forward to your comments. best Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez +506 8837 7176 Skype: carlos.raulg On 22 Jun 2015, at 17:47, Mathieu Weill wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
[Staff accountability - discussion starter.pdf]
[Staff accountability - discussion starter.docx]
[Board duties - discussion starter.pdf]
[Diversity - discussion starter.pdf]
[Diversity - discussion starter.docx]
[SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.pdf]
[SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.docx]
[Board duties - discussion starter.docx] _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear Mathieu and all, Thank you Mathieu for initiating the discussions. At this point, we really find it appropriate to prioritize our resources towards finalizing our proposal. Given that we have already identified the core essential components of accountability requirements for WS1, we should focus on refining the details of those requirements. We still have work to do especially on the community empowerment model, and on refining the proposed text in the Bylaws including the CWG requirements. Based on this, we suggest to move the discussion on these topics, including their relevance or not to the CCWG, to WS2. Best Regards, Athina, Fiona, Jorge, Izumi On 2015/06/23 5:47, Mathieu Weill wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hi Mathieu, Thanks for sharing these thoughts and papers. As some of them are partially addressed in the current ICANN Strategy and Operating Plan processes, particularly Objectives 3 and 5 of the FY16 Operating Plan and Budget, I would recommend that any action and/or next step is cross-checked with the initiatives already foreseen in the FY16 Op Plan and Budget. Happy to help the working group with this cross-check if deemed appropriate. Best, Giovanni On 22 Jun 2015, at 17:47, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL <Staff accountability - discussion starter.pdf><Staff accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.docx><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.pdf><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.docx>_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community Giovanni Seppia External Relations Manager EURid Woluwelaan 150 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/> [cid:2934C4EE-CAF2-4BA4-9DC0-AB9A25CC6ADC@Docomointertouch.com] #2015euWA Please consider the environment before printing this email.<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu> Disclaimer: This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses. http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer
Hi Giovanni, As the Chair of the ccNSO strategy and operatIng plan working group, I know you are most familiar with Icann's strategic plan. It would certainly be helpful if you could expand here a little bit about which initiatives from Icann you refer to ? According to the FY16 operating plan (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-2016-2020...) Objective 3, if I'm not mistaken, is : advance organizational, technological and operational excellence Objective 5 is : develop and implement a global public interest framlework bounded by Icann's mission. Supporting existing Icann initiatives by making explicit reference to them in our proposals is definitely the easiest option for us ;-) Best Mathieu Le 24/06/2015 15:38, Giovanni Seppia a écrit :
Hi Mathieu,
Thanks for sharing these thoughts and papers.
As some of them are partially addressed in the current ICANN Strategy and Operating Plan processes, particularly Objectives 3 and 5 of the FY16 Operating Plan and Budget, I would recommend that any action and/or next step is cross-checked with the initiatives already foreseen in the FY16 Op Plan and Budget.
Happy to help the working group with this cross-check if deemed appropriate.
Best,
Giovanni
On 22 Jun 2015, at 17:47, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability
In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters.
It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread.
Best regards,
-- Mathieu WEILL
<Staff accountability - discussion starter.pdf><Staff accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.docx><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.pdf><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.docx>_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Giovanni Seppia /External Relations Manager/ // * * *EUR/id/* * Woluwelaan 150 // 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu <mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu <http://www.eurid.eu/> * * * * ** * * * * **** * * * * * * * * ** * * * * **** * * * * * * * * ** * * * * **** * * * *
#2015euWA
****Please consider the environment before printing this email. <http://christmas2014.eurid.eu>**** * * * * **** * * * * ** * * * * * * * * **** * * * * ** * * * * * * * * **** * * * * ** * * * * *
*Disclaimer:* /This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses./ Other languages: English <http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer> Estonian <http://www.eurid.eu/et/legal-disclaimer> Italian <http://www.eurid.eu/it/legal-disclaimer> Maltese <http://www.eurid.eu/mt/legal-disclaimer> Romanian <http://www.eurid.eu/ro/legal-disclaimer> Swedish <http://www.eurid.eu/sv/legal-disclaimer> Czech <http://www.eurid.eu/cs/legal-disclaimer> Spanish <http://www.eurid.eu/es/legal-disclaimer> Latvian <http://www.eurid.eu/lv/legal-disclaimer> Dutch <http://www.eurid.eu/nl/legal-disclaimer> Slovak <http://www.eurid.eu/sk/legal-disclaimer> Greek <http://www.eurid.eu/el/legal-disclaimer> Danish <http://www.eurid.eu/da/legal-disclaimer> French <http://www.eurid.eu/fr/legal-disclaimer> Lithuanian <http://www.eurid.eu/lt/legal-disclaimer> Polish <http://www.eurid.eu/pl/legal-disclaimer> Slovenian <http://www.eurid.eu/sl/legal-disclaimer> Bulgarian <http://www.eurid.eu/bg/legal-disclaimer> German <http://www.eurid.eu/de/legal-disclaimer> Gaelic <http://www.eurid.eu/ga/legal-disclaimer> Hungarian <http://www.eurid.eu/hu/legal-disclaimer> Portuguese <http://www.eurid.eu/pt/legal-disclaimer> Finnish <http://www.eurid.eu/fi/legal-disclaimer> Croatian <http://www.eurid.eu/hr/legal-disclaimer>
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
Hi Mathieu, Happy to further elaborate. Objective 3 of the FY16 ICANN Operating Plan and Budget - in line with the ICANN Strategy Plan FY16-FY20 - is “Advance Organisational, Technological and Operational Excellence”. Goal 3.1, “Ensure ICANN’s long-term financial accountability, stability and sustainability”. Within it, ICANN aims to introduce the first internal EFQM radar evaluation ("The EFQM Excellence Model allows people to understand the cause and effect relationships between what their organisation does and the results it achieves”). Goal 3.3, “Develop a globally diverse culture of knowledge and expertise available to ICANN’s Board, staff, and stakeholders”. Part of the goal is to identify benchmark organisations and derive key benchmarking metrics, leadership development, team effectiveness, learning and skill development. At the same time, ICANN will soon launch its first strategy and operating objectives public dashboard. That should be in late August. This tool is of paramount importance both at internal level to help ICANN staff to self-assess their progress against the various goals and actions, and at the community level as it will empower the community to have a regularly updated overview of where ICANN stands against the strategy and operating objectives and goals. Objective 5 of the FY16 ICANN Operating Plan and Budget - in line with the ICANN Strategy Plan FY16-FY20 - is “Develop and Implement a Global Public Interest Framework Bounded by ICANN’s Mission”. Goal 5.1, ‘Act as a steward of the public interest”. Part of the goal is to “create framework to assist the decision-makers, policy–making bodies and advisory committees to align their work to the global public interest purpose”. Goal 5.2, “Promote ethics, transparence and accountability across the ICANN community”. The goal includes regular review to monitor internal and external accountability. Furthermore, as stated during the ccNSO meeting with ICANN Board session on Tuesday, ccNSO SOP session, I think that ICANN is making good progress against the introduction of a performance assessment culture. The ICANN Board should further support the positive culture of measuring performance and focussing on performance needs at senior management level. Therefore, the current ICANN strategy and operating plans already contain explicit objectives, goals and actions to refine and eventually strengthen ICANN staff accountability culture as well as SO/AC empowerment, effectiveness and accountability (for SO/AC, Goal 1, “evolving SO/AC structures to increase Community efficiencies and effectiveness in ICANN processes and activities”, Goal 5.3.2 “enhanced relationships with SO/ACs and the wider community”). It might indeed be quite valuable to refer and support the existing efforts in the CCWG proposal. At the same time, I would recommend to firmly support the need to ensure consistency and continuation of the accountability culture “building process” at ICANN staff senior level considering the changes that might occur when the new ICANN CEO is appointed (and considering what the community witnessed with previous CEO’s transitions). Best, Giovanni On 25 Jun 2015, at 07:43, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Hi Giovanni, As the Chair of the ccNSO strategy and operatIng plan working group, I know you are most familiar with Icann's strategic plan. It would certainly be helpful if you could expand here a little bit about which initiatives from Icann you refer to ? According to the FY16 operating plan (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-2016-2020...) Objective 3, if I'm not mistaken, is : advance organizational, technological and operational excellence Objective 5 is : develop and implement a global public interest framlework bounded by Icann's mission. Supporting existing Icann initiatives by making explicit reference to them in our proposals is definitely the easiest option for us ;-) Best Mathieu Le 24/06/2015 15:38, Giovanni Seppia a écrit : Hi Mathieu, Thanks for sharing these thoughts and papers. As some of them are partially addressed in the current ICANN Strategy and Operating Plan processes, particularly Objectives 3 and 5 of the FY16 Operating Plan and Budget, I would recommend that any action and/or next step is cross-checked with the initiatives already foreseen in the FY16 Op Plan and Budget. Happy to help the working group with this cross-check if deemed appropriate. Best, Giovanni On 22 Jun 2015, at 17:47, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL <Staff accountability - discussion starter.pdf><Staff accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.docx><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.pdf><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.docx>_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community Giovanni Seppia External Relations Manager EURid Woluwelaan 150 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/> <Mail Attachment.jpeg> #2015euWA Please consider the environment before printing this email.<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu/> Disclaimer: This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses. Other languages: English<http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer> Estonian<http://www.eurid.eu/et/legal-disclaimer> Italian<http://www.eurid.eu/it/legal-disclaimer> Maltese<http://www.eurid.eu/mt/legal-disclaimer> Romanian<http://www.eurid.eu/ro/legal-disclaimer> Swedish<http://www.eurid.eu/sv/legal-disclaimer> Czech<http://www.eurid.eu/cs/legal-disclaimer> Spanish<http://www.eurid.eu/es/legal-disclaimer> Latvian<http://www.eurid.eu/lv/legal-disclaimer> Dutch<http://www.eurid.eu/nl/legal-disclaimer> Slovak<http://www.eurid.eu/sk/legal-disclaimer> Greek<http://www.eurid.eu/el/legal-disclaimer> Danish<http://www.eurid.eu/da/legal-disclaimer> French<http://www.eurid.eu/fr/legal-disclaimer> Lithuanian<http://www.eurid.eu/lt/legal-disclaimer> Polish<http://www.eurid.eu/pl/legal-disclaimer> Slovenian<http://www.eurid.eu/sl/legal-disclaimer> Bulgarian<http://www.eurid.eu/bg/legal-disclaimer> German<http://www.eurid.eu/de/legal-disclaimer> Gaelic<http://www.eurid.eu/ga/legal-disclaimer> Hungarian<http://www.eurid.eu/hu/legal-disclaimer> Portuguese<http://www.eurid.eu/pt/legal-disclaimer> Finnish<http://www.eurid.eu/fi/legal-disclaimer> Croatian<http://www.eurid.eu/hr/legal-disclaimer> -- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> Twitter : @mathieuweill ***************************** Giovanni Seppia External Relations Manager EURid Woluwelaan 150 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/> [cid:2934C4EE-CAF2-4BA4-9DC0-AB9A25CC6ADC@Docomointertouch.com] #2015euWA Please consider the environment before printing this email.<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu> Disclaimer: This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses. http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer
Hi Mathieu, Happy to volunteer to address these aspects in the proposal. Best, Giovanni On 25 Jun 2015, at 11:14, Giovanni Seppia <Giovanni.Seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:Giovanni.Seppia@eurid.eu>> wrote: Hi Mathieu, Happy to further elaborate. Objective 3 of the FY16 ICANN Operating Plan and Budget - in line with the ICANN Strategy Plan FY16-FY20 - is “Advance Organisational, Technological and Operational Excellence”. Goal 3.1, “Ensure ICANN’s long-term financial accountability, stability and sustainability”. Within it, ICANN aims to introduce the first internal EFQM radar evaluation ("The EFQM Excellence Model allows people to understand the cause and effect relationships between what their organisation does and the results it achieves”). Goal 3.3, “Develop a globally diverse culture of knowledge and expertise available to ICANN’s Board, staff, and stakeholders”. Part of the goal is to identify benchmark organisations and derive key benchmarking metrics, leadership development, team effectiveness, learning and skill development. At the same time, ICANN will soon launch its first strategy and operating objectives public dashboard. That should be in late August. This tool is of paramount importance both at internal level to help ICANN staff to self-assess their progress against the various goals and actions, and at the community level as it will empower the community to have a regularly updated overview of where ICANN stands against the strategy and operating objectives and goals. Objective 5 of the FY16 ICANN Operating Plan and Budget - in line with the ICANN Strategy Plan FY16-FY20 - is “Develop and Implement a Global Public Interest Framework Bounded by ICANN’s Mission”. Goal 5.1, ‘Act as a steward of the public interest”. Part of the goal is to “create framework to assist the decision-makers, policy–making bodies and advisory committees to align their work to the global public interest purpose”. Goal 5.2, “Promote ethics, transparence and accountability across the ICANN community”. The goal includes regular review to monitor internal and external accountability. Furthermore, as stated during the ccNSO meeting with ICANN Board session on Tuesday, ccNSO SOP session, I think that ICANN is making good progress against the introduction of a performance assessment culture. The ICANN Board should further support the positive culture of measuring performance and focussing on performance needs at senior management level. Therefore, the current ICANN strategy and operating plans already contain explicit objectives, goals and actions to refine and eventually strengthen ICANN staff accountability culture as well as SO/AC empowerment, effectiveness and accountability (for SO/AC, Goal 1, “evolving SO/AC structures to increase Community efficiencies and effectiveness in ICANN processes and activities”, Goal 5.3.2 “enhanced relationships with SO/ACs and the wider community”). It might indeed be quite valuable to refer and support the existing efforts in the CCWG proposal. At the same time, I would recommend to firmly support the need to ensure consistency and continuation of the accountability culture “building process” at ICANN staff senior level considering the changes that might occur when the new ICANN CEO is appointed (and considering what the community witnessed with previous CEO’s transitions). Best, Giovanni On 25 Jun 2015, at 07:43, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Hi Giovanni, As the Chair of the ccNSO strategy and operatIng plan working group, I know you are most familiar with Icann's strategic plan. It would certainly be helpful if you could expand here a little bit about which initiatives from Icann you refer to ? According to the FY16 operating plan (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-2016-2020...) Objective 3, if I'm not mistaken, is : advance organizational, technological and operational excellence Objective 5 is : develop and implement a global public interest framlework bounded by Icann's mission. Supporting existing Icann initiatives by making explicit reference to them in our proposals is definitely the easiest option for us ;-) Best Mathieu Le 24/06/2015 15:38, Giovanni Seppia a écrit : Hi Mathieu, Thanks for sharing these thoughts and papers. As some of them are partially addressed in the current ICANN Strategy and Operating Plan processes, particularly Objectives 3 and 5 of the FY16 Operating Plan and Budget, I would recommend that any action and/or next step is cross-checked with the initiatives already foreseen in the FY16 Op Plan and Budget. Happy to help the working group with this cross-check if deemed appropriate. Best, Giovanni On 22 Jun 2015, at 17:47, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As discussed last friday when we reviewed the public comments, some of the feedback we have received require us to consider whether and how we should address several topics : - staff accountability culture - Board duties and roles - enhancing diversity - enhancing SO/AC accountability In order to kick start discussions on these topics, we have assembled one pagers attempting to describe each issue (based essentially on comments we have received) as well some of the potential actions that were suggested. Please note that these are discussion papers and in no way reflect any "position" on the matters. It is anticipated that we could have initial discussions on these topics In our upcoming work sessions. But this mailing list is also an appropriate place to share your reflections on these matters, as I noted Jordan already did on another thread. Best regards, -- Mathieu WEILL <Staff accountability - discussion starter.pdf><Staff accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.pdf><Diversity - discussion starter.docx><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.pdf><SOAC Accountability - discussion starter.docx><Board duties - discussion starter.docx>_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community Giovanni Seppia External Relations Manager EURid Woluwelaan 150 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/> <Mail Attachment.jpeg> #2015euWA Please consider the environment before printing this email.<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu/> Disclaimer: This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses. Other languages: English<http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer> Estonian<http://www.eurid.eu/et/legal-disclaimer> Italian<http://www.eurid.eu/it/legal-disclaimer> Maltese<http://www.eurid.eu/mt/legal-disclaimer> Romanian<http://www.eurid.eu/ro/legal-disclaimer> Swedish<http://www.eurid.eu/sv/legal-disclaimer> Czech<http://www.eurid.eu/cs/legal-disclaimer> Spanish<http://www.eurid.eu/es/legal-disclaimer> Latvian<http://www.eurid.eu/lv/legal-disclaimer> Dutch<http://www.eurid.eu/nl/legal-disclaimer> Slovak<http://www.eurid.eu/sk/legal-disclaimer> Greek<http://www.eurid.eu/el/legal-disclaimer> Danish<http://www.eurid.eu/da/legal-disclaimer> French<http://www.eurid.eu/fr/legal-disclaimer> Lithuanian<http://www.eurid.eu/lt/legal-disclaimer> Polish<http://www.eurid.eu/pl/legal-disclaimer> Slovenian<http://www.eurid.eu/sl/legal-disclaimer> Bulgarian<http://www.eurid.eu/bg/legal-disclaimer> German<http://www.eurid.eu/de/legal-disclaimer> Gaelic<http://www.eurid.eu/ga/legal-disclaimer> Hungarian<http://www.eurid.eu/hu/legal-disclaimer> Portuguese<http://www.eurid.eu/pt/legal-disclaimer> Finnish<http://www.eurid.eu/fi/legal-disclaimer> Croatian<http://www.eurid.eu/hr/legal-disclaimer> -- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> Twitter : @mathieuweill ***************************** Giovanni Seppia External Relations Manager EURid Woluwelaan 150 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/> <image001.jpg> #2015euWA Please consider the environment before printing this email.<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu/> Disclaimer: This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses. Other languages: English<http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer> Estonian<http://www.eurid.eu/et/legal-disclaimer> Italian<http://www.eurid.eu/it/legal-disclaimer> Maltese<http://www.eurid.eu/mt/legal-disclaimer> Romanian<http://www.eurid.eu/ro/legal-disclaimer> Swedish<http://www.eurid.eu/sv/legal-disclaimer> Czech<http://www.eurid.eu/cs/legal-disclaimer> Spanish<http://www.eurid.eu/es/legal-disclaimer> Latvian<http://www.eurid.eu/lv/legal-disclaimer> Dutch<http://www.eurid.eu/nl/legal-disclaimer> Slovak<http://www.eurid.eu/sk/legal-disclaimer> Greek<http://www.eurid.eu/el/legal-disclaimer> Danish<http://www.eurid.eu/da/legal-disclaimer> French<http://www.eurid.eu/fr/legal-disclaimer> Lithuanian<http://www.eurid.eu/lt/legal-disclaimer> Polish<http://www.eurid.eu/pl/legal-disclaimer> Slovenian<http://www.eurid.eu/sl/legal-disclaimer> Bulgarian<http://www.eurid.eu/bg/legal-disclaimer> German<http://www.eurid.eu/de/legal-disclaimer> Gaelic<http://www.eurid.eu/ga/legal-disclaimer> Hungarian<http://www.eurid.eu/hu/legal-disclaimer> Portuguese<http://www.eurid.eu/pt/legal-disclaimer> Finnish<http://www.eurid.eu/fi/legal-disclaimer> Croatian<http://www.eurid.eu/hr/legal-disclaimer> _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community Giovanni Seppia External Relations Manager EURid Woluwelaan 150 1831 Diegem - Belgium TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750 MOB:+39 335 8141733 giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia@eurid.eu> http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/> [cid:2934C4EE-CAF2-4BA4-9DC0-AB9A25CC6ADC@Docomointertouch.com] #2015euWA Please consider the environment before printing this email.<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu> Disclaimer: This email and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or if you have received this email in error, please delete it and immediately contact the sender by telephone or email, and destroy any copies of this information. You should not use or copy it, nor disclose its content to any other person or rely upon this information. Please note that any views presented in the email and any attachment hereto are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of EURid. While all care has been taken to avoid any known viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email and any attachment for presence of viruses. http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer
participants (13)
-
Arun Sukumar -
Barrack Otieno -
Burr, Becky -
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -
Chris Disspain -
Dr Eberhard W Lisse -
Finn Petersen -
Giovanni Seppia -
Greg Shatan -
Izumi Okutani -
Kavouss Arasteh -
Mathieu Weill -
Matthew Shears