August 2014 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Fwd: draft NCSG accountability statement
by Evan Leibovitch Aug. 13, 2014

Aug. 13, 2014

Hello all. The following is the current draft of the NCSG statement on the current ICANN Accountability processes. I ask my fellow At-Largers to read and consider this statement; I would like to suggest ALAC's endorsing it. - Evan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Cintra Sooknanan <cintra.sooknanan(a)gmail.com> Date: 11 August 2014 17:54 Subject: Re: draft NCSG accountability statement To: NCSG-DISCUSS(a)listserv.syr.edu Dear All I have made some edits to the google doc mostly tightening up the language. Updated text is posted below for your ease of reference Regards Cintra Sooknanan DRAFT Proposed NCSG Statement on ICANN Staff’s Accountability Plan v.03 The NCSG appreciates this opportunity to provide feedback regarding the ICANN Staff’s non-stakeholder led proposal for further work on “Enhancing Accountability” at ICANN. A number of public comments and discussions in London focused on the inherent conflict of interest behind staff developing its own accountability and transparency mechanisms, so it was surprising to see that input had not been taken into account in the development of this proposal. NCSG notes its disappointment with the staff having skipped the step of providing a synthesis of the community feedback received from the ICANN public comments forum and the London accountability discussions. Over a month ago, staff assured it was working on this during GNSO Council and SO/AC leadership calls since the London meeting; normally, staff can produce a synthesis of a comment period within a week, so we are at a loss to explain this delay. NCSG reiterates its request to see the synthesis of public input upon which staff relied in the formulation of its accountability proposal. It is impossible to know where the components of staff’s proposal come from and on what basis they are called for, without being privy to staff’s assessment of the public input on the subject. It is difficult to find those elements in the written comments to effectively evaluate the proposal. At a time when the world is indeed watching ICANN to discern if it can be trusted without NTIA oversight of its global governance functions, and is particularly interested in the formulation of a proposal for resolving ICANN’s accountability crisis; to skip the step of providing the rationale for staff’s proposal, including its basis in the community’s stakeholder comments, seems imprudent at best. From its inception, the community should have been engaged in the formulation of the proposal, not pressured into signing-off on a staff proposal at the 11th hour. This is an example of top-down policymaking, which runs counter to ICANN’s bottom-up methodology and may inspire mistrust on the part of the stakeholders. Regarding the substance of the staff proposal, the NCSG does not support it as currently drafted. Of particular concern is the proposed Community Coordination Group (CCG), which would prioritize issues identified by the community and build solutions for those issues. As proposed by staff, this group is too heavily controlled by the ICANN board and staff and as such it replicates the problem of ICANN’s accountability structures being circular and lacking independence. We reiterate that given the overwhelming number of public comments submitted supporting the need for an independent accountability mechanisms, it is unclear on what basis ICANN staff proposed a solution in which the ICANN board and staff would fill a large number of the seats on the CCG. It is also unclear on what basis staff thinks board-picked advisors should have an equal voice as representatives of community members. Outside experts are welcome and can provide valuable input, but they should be selected by and report to the community not the board or staff, for independent accountability to be achieved. An advisor’s role must be clarified as an informational role, rather than a decision making role that representatives of stakeholder interests would hold in a bottom-up process. It is also necessary that the role of any ICANN board or staff on this CCG serve in a non-decision making, support or liaison function. For the CCG to have legitimacy as a participatory form of democracy, the decision-making members must consist of stakeholders, not the ICANN board and staff. The make-up, roles and responsibilities of the members of the proposed CCG must be reformulated in a more bottom-up fashion by the community for this proposal to be acceptable. On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg(a)isoc-cr.org> wrote: > Thune & Rubio certainly deserve a place in the Accountability discussion! > > Enviado desde mi iPad > > _________________________ > email carlosraul(a)gutierrez.se > skype carlos.raulg > cel +506 8335 2487 > home +506 4000 2000 > > Apartado 1571-1000 > San jose COSTA RICA > > > El 11/08/2014, a las 10:23, Edward Morris <emorris(a)MILK.TOAST.NET> > escribió: > > Hi Avri, > > Thanks for doing this. > > Would it be possible to insert the word "transparency" in the document > somewhere? I'd suggest here: > > > inherent conflict of interest behind staff developing its own > accountability *and transparency* mechanisms, so it was surprising to see > that input had > > > > but anywhere is fine. The important thing is to keep the concept alive, > and the concept of accountability broad. > > I'll note that the Thune-Rubio letter that so concerned Mr. Chehade: > > > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/thune-rubio-to-crocker… > > calls for a FOIA type mechanism at ICANN. In debating accountability > structures I don't want to lose sight of the fact that accountability > without transparency is impossible. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > > > -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

7 9

ICANN Accountability track news
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Aug. 11, 2014

Aug. 11, 2014

Dear ALAC, SO/AC & SG Chairs have held a call on Monday to discuss the ICANN Accountability track, the creation of working groups relating to this track and its own relation to the NTIA stewardship transition track. The call looked at a first draft of a diagram supplied by ICANN staff and comments were received, some of them being quite negative about the track itself. There was concern shown that the creation of two additional committees would stress the volunteer community. There was also concern shown that the Community Coordination Group on Accountability & Governance would contain 7 advisors selected by the Board Governance Committee. GNSO members also complained that the GNSO would only have 1 person on this committee. Finally, for the Community Assembly on Accountability & Governance, although up to 7 participants could be appointed per SO/AC and 4 per SG, some call participants asked that additional observers should be welcome. Others asked that the Community Assembly on Accountability & Governance should actually be a Cross Community Working Group (CWG), structured and selected as such - and of course led by the community. Please find attached the draft that Staff sent as a result of the discussion. It is not vastly different from its first version and is therefore likely to change - and I therefore ask for your comments that I could relay to ICANN Staff. On a related topic, as you know the ALAC has decided to delegate its groundwork on the accountability track to the Future Challenges WG. As we are at preliminary stage & the track has not started yet, I am sending this email to the ALAC working list but as soon as the track launches, discussion will take place in the FCWG. Kindest regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair A new diagram was

3 5

Report on Workshop No.14 Digital Divide at the APrIGF [FINAL]
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Aug. 7, 2014

Aug. 7, 2014

Dear APRALO Chair, ALAC Chair, ALAC, The *South Pacific Computer Society* as a member of APRALO reached out to its counterparts in Asia Pacific to tell the Asia Pacific story on the Digital Divide. We felt that it was important to start the dialogue as well as to document it. As such we organised a Workshop and also reached out to our colleagues from at least three other ALSes in APRALO, namely ISOC AU, CSI, ISOC HK who also shared their perspectives on the Digital Divide. The transcripts will be available later. For now here is the summary of our Workshop that was held in New Delhi yesterday. One of the breakthroughs yesterday is that it was co-moderated on and off-site so we in essence defeated time and the geographical divide through ICT. With every best wish, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro *President, South Pacific Computer Society (SPaCS)*

3 3

Baby news!!!!!
by Beran Gillen - Yahoo Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

Dear all, Just wanted to share the wonderful news with you. I had an uncomplicated delivery last night August 2 , 2014 beautiful baby girl. I am recovering well in hospital and both mommy and baby are doing fine. Thank you for all your well wishes. Here's a pic to enjoy !!!! Beran "There is nothing more difficult to arrange and more dangerous to carry through than initiating change..." Machiavelli Sent from my iPhone

12 12

Re: [ALAC] Board Decisions
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

I realize that I replied to Rinalia directly and not the list. I was not asking for a secret report to be released. The Board motion said that the report was to be posted for public comment. I was just trying to get it out quicker. Hopefully it will be posted later today. Alan At 04/08/2014 11:57 AM, Eduardo Diaz wrote: >I volunteer to be the pen holder for this item. > >-ed > > >On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim ><<mailto:rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Alan, I suggest you direct the request to George Sadowsky (who chairs the >BWG NomCom). I don't see the report in the public sphere. > >Rinalia > > >On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >wrote: > > > Rinalia, can you please provide a copy of the Final Report of BWG-NomCom. > > I can't see why we should have to wait for the PC start. > > > > I note that there is a typo in the related motion - presumably a missing > > word such as "discussion" after the word Board. > > > > Whereas, the SIC recommends that this report should be posted for public > >> comment prior to further Board of the potential adoption of the 15 > >> recommendations. > >> > > > > Alan > > > > > > At 02/08/2014 01:54 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote: > > > >> ALAC, > >> > >> Decisions from the Board's recent meeting have been posted. > >> > >> > <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-07-30-en>https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-07-30-en > >> > >> Note that the recommendations of the Board Working Group on NomCom will be > >> posted for public comments. Important to have ALAC input on that. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Rinalia > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ALAC mailing list > >> <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >> > >> At-Large Online: > <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >> ALAC Working Wiki: > <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+ > >> Advisory+Committee+(ALAC) > >> > > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… > > > > >-- >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.

2 1

Re: [ALAC] Board Decisions
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

Rinalia, can you please provide a copy of the Final Report of BWG-NomCom. I can't see why we should have to wait for the PC start. I note that there is a typo in the related motion - presumably a missing word such as "discussion" after the word Board. >Whereas, the SIC recommends that this report should be posted for >public comment prior to further Board of the potential adoption of >the 15 recommendations. Alan At 02/08/2014 01:54 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote: >ALAC, > >Decisions from the Board's recent meeting have been posted. > >https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-07-30-en > >Note that the recommendations of the Board Working Group on NomCom will be >posted for public comments. Important to have ALAC input on that. > >Best regards, > >Rinalia >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: >https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…

3 2

Re: [ALAC] Baby news!!!!!
by Fatima Cambronero Aug. 3, 2014

Aug. 3, 2014

Great news! Congratulations Beran! Cheers for you and your baby girl! Fatima 2014-08-03 14:02 GMT-03:00 Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa(a)planet.tn>: > Wow! Wonderful! > > > > Congratulation Beran; A new sweet ICANNer is born: I hope she will be one > of > the best At-Large members in 20 years or so.... > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > Tijani BEN JEMAA > > Executive Director > > Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) > > Phone: + 216 41 649 605 > > Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 > > Fax: + 216 70 853 376 > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Beran Gillen - > Yahoo > Envoyé : dimanche 3 août 2014 06:57 > À : ALAC Working List > Cc : ICANN At-Large Staff > Objet : [ALAC] Baby news!!!!! > > > > Dear all, > > > > Just wanted to share the wonderful news with you. I had an uncomplicated > delivery last night August 2 , 2014 beautiful baby girl. I am recovering > well in hospital and both mommy and baby are doing fine. Thank you for all > your well wishes. > > > > Here's a pic to enjoy !!!! > > > > > > --- > Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant > parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. > http://www.avast.com > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > ALAC Working Wiki: > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… > -- *Fatima Cambronero* Abogada-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter: @facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero

1 0

Here is the pic seems I missed it
by Beran Gillen - Yahoo Aug. 3, 2014

Aug. 3, 2014

"There is nothing more difficult to arrange and more dangerous to carry through than initiating change..." Machiavelli Sent from my iPhone

2 1

Board Decisions
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Aug. 2, 2014

Aug. 2, 2014

ALAC, Decisions from the Board's recent meeting have been posted. https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-07-30-en Note that the recommendations of the Board Working Group on NomCom will be posted for public comments. Important to have ALAC input on that. Best regards, Rinalia

2 1