IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity. The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB) As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards (https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000...), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse). According to the original recommendations document (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi...): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization. I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman. Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views? Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP
PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
Preamble:
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
Summary of Responses from Public Comments:
* Total of 15 comments
* 6 had no comments on an office of diversity * 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel * 3 supported an office of diversity * 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
* Breakdown by major categories
* 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
* 4 had no comments * 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
* 2 Governments:
* 1 had no comments on an office of diversity * 1 supported an office of diversity
* 6 Individuals/Associations:
* 1 had no comments on an office of diversity * 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel * 2 supported an office of diversity
Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
Required Actions:
The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
Hi Alan I will repeat a message I sent to an internal group as my only comment on the matter. I am not in favour of a formal office for diversity. In the multi-stakeholder bottom-up organisation that ICANN is supposed to be, diversity should be one of the underpinning features of its corporate culture. It shouldn't have to be defined and detailed. It should be characterised by the inclusive nature of its policies and practices. I agree with you in that we don't need more bureaucracy, we just need ICANN org to actively and constructively work with the rich diversity of the membership groups of ICANN so that we can together successfully achieve our mission. Dealing with any diversity issues can be given to the Ombudsman and his/her team. Maureen On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/ pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct- ws2-draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
*DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP *
*PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS *
*Preamble: *
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
*Summary of Responses from Public Comments: *
- Total of 15 comments
- 6 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 3 supported an office of diversity - 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
- Breakdown by major categories
- 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
- 4 had no comments - 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
- 2 Governments:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 1 supported an office of diversity
- 6 Individuals/Associations:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 2 supported an office of diversity
*Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: *
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
*Required Actions: * The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+ LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+ A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+ LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+ A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
Well said, Maureen. Big +1. Deeds! -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 7:42 PM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Alan
I will repeat a message I sent to an internal group as my only comment on the matter.
I am not in favour of a formal office for diversity.
In the multi-stakeholder bottom-up organisation that ICANN is supposed to be, diversity should be one of the underpinning features of its corporate culture. It shouldn't have to be defined and detailed. It should be characterised by the inclusive nature of its policies and practices. I agree with you in that we don't need more bureaucracy, we just need ICANN org to actively and constructively work with the rich diversity of the membership groups of ICANN so that we can together successfully achieve our mission. Dealing with any diversity issues can be given to the Ombudsman and his/her team.
Maureen
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail /comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2- draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
*DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP *
*PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS *
*Preamble: *
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
*Summary of Responses from Public Comments: *
- Total of 15 comments
- 6 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 3 supported an office of diversity - 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
- Breakdown by major categories
- 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
- 4 had no comments - 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
- 2 Governments:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 1 supported an office of diversity
- 6 Individuals/Associations:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 2 supported an office of diversity
*Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: *
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
*Required Actions: * The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQ C+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCM G4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2 +rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRaj G4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQ C+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCM G4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2 +rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRaj G4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
Folks Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context. If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue. If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them! If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task. In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card. Holly On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP
PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
Preamble:
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
Summary of Responses from Public Comments:
Total of 15 comments
6 had no comments on an office of diversity 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel 3 supported an office of diversity 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
Breakdown by major categories
7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
4 had no comments 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
2 Governments:
1 had no comments on an office of diversity 1 supported an office of diversity
6 Individuals/Associations:
1 had no comments on an office of diversity 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel 2 supported an office of diversity
Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
Required Actions:
The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
+1 Holly On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/ pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct- ws2-draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
*DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP *
*PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS *
*Preamble: *
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
*Summary of Responses from Public Comments: *
- Total of 15 comments
- 6 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 3 supported an office of diversity - 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
- Breakdown by major categories
- 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
- 4 had no comments - 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
- 2 Governments:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 1 supported an office of diversity
- 6 Individuals/Associations:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 2 supported an office of diversity
*Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: *
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
*Required Actions: * The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+ LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+ A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+ LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+ A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
<Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________ _________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
I am with Holly in this matter. I am always in favor to promote diversity as you all know that but not mandatory over the qualification and adequacy for any place. I never agreed with the common obligation is many places around the world with mandatory percentages of women, or other gender, or other race. Equal opportunity meaning to be equal. Not because you are this or that you should be chosen in prejudice of a more qualified people for the position. Diversity is to be open to ANY qualified people for a job, a contract, a volunteer position, election etc. Kisses to all Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. From: ALAC <alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 at 23:20 To: Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> Cc: 'ALAC List' <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS +1 Holly On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net<mailto:h.raiche@internode.on.net>> wrote: Folks Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context. If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue. If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them! If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task. In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card. Holly On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote: I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity. The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB) As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse). According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization. I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman. Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views? Alan From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com<mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com>> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org<mailto:ws2-diversity@icann.org>> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS All, As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 For Fiona and Rafik. DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS Preamble: The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. Summary of Responses from Public Comments: · Total of 15 comments o 6 had no comments on an office of diversity o 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel o 3 supported an office of diversity o 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. · Breakdown by major categories o 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): § 4 had no comments § 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity o 2 Governments: § 1 had no comments on an office of diversity § 1 supported an office of diversity o 6 Individuals/Associations: § 1 had no comments on an office of diversity § 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel § 2 supported an office of diversity Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. 2. Establishment of an office of diversity 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. Required Actions: The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org<mailto:Ws2-diversity@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:ALAC@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+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:ALAC@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+(ALA...)
Hi, I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others. That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement. Kaili ----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS +1 Holly On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context. If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue. If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them! If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task. In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card. Holly On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity. The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB) As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse). According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization. I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman. Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views? Alan From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS All, As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 For Fiona and Rafik. DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS Preamble: The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. Summary of Responses from Public Comments: a.. Total of 15 comments a.. 6 had no comments on an office of diversity b.. 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel c.. 3 supported an office of diversity d.. 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. a.. Breakdown by major categories a.. 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): a.. 4 had no comments b.. 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity a.. 2 Governments: a.. 1 had no comments on an office of diversity b.. 1 supported an office of diversity a.. 6 Individuals/Associations: a.. 1 had no comments on an office of diversity b.. 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel c.. 2 supported an office of diversity Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. 2. Establishment of an office of diversity 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. Required Actions: The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while... --andrei 2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>:
Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- *From:* Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> *To:* Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> *Cc:* ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> ; Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM *Subject:* Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail /comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2- draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
*DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP*
*PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS*
*Preamble:*
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
*Summary of Responses from Public Comments:*
- Total of 15 comments
- 6 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 3 supported an office of diversity - 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
- Breakdown by major categories
- 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
- 4 had no comments - 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
- 2 Governments:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 1 supported an office of diversity
- 6 Individuals/Associations:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 2 supported an office of diversity
*Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:*
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
*Required Actions:* The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQ C+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCM G4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2 +rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRaj G4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQ C+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCM G4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2 +rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRaj G4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
<Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________ _________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014- However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents. Javier Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>:
Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP
PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
Preamble:
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
Summary of Responses from Public Comments:
Total of 15 comments
6 had no comments on an office of diversity 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel 3 supported an office of diversity 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
Breakdown by major categories
7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
4 had no comments 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
2 Governments:
1 had no comments on an office of diversity 1 supported an office of diversity
6 Individuals/Associations:
1 had no comments on an office of diversity 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel 2 supported an office of diversity
Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
Required Actions:
The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea. As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated: 'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’ (Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP
PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
Preamble:
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
Summary of Responses from Public Comments:
• Total of 15 comments
• 6 had no comments on an office of diversity • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel • 3 supported an office of diversity • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
• Breakdown by major categories
• 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
• 4 had no comments • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
• 2 Governments:
• 1 had no comments on an office of diversity • 1 supported an office of diversity
• 6 Individuals/Associations:
• 1 had no comments on an office of diversity • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel • 2 supported an office of diversity
Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
Required Actions:
The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability-diversity-26oct17/atta... saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints. Dev Anand On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea.
As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated:
'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’
(Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP
PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
Preamble:
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
Summary of Responses from Public Comments:
• Total of 15 comments
• 6 had no comments on an office of diversity • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel • 3 supported an office of diversity • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
• Breakdown by major categories
• 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
• 4 had no comments • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
• 2 Governments:
• 1 had no comments on an office of diversity • 1 supported an office of diversity
• 6 Individuals/Associations:
• 1 had no comments on an office of diversity • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel • 2 supported an office of diversity
Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
Required Actions:
The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
Good decision. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. On 2/16/18, 16:46, "ALAC on behalf of Dev Anand Teelucksingh" <alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of devtee@gmail.com> wrote: As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability-diversity-26oct17/atta... saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints. Dev Anand On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote: > I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea. > > As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated: > > 'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’ > > (Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’) > > >> On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. >> http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014- >> >> However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? >> 2 Cents. >> >> Javier >> >> >> >> >> Javier Rúa-Jovet >> >> +1-787-396-6511 >> twitter: @javrua >> skype: javier.rua1 >> https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua >> >> >> On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote: >> >>> OMG! >>> Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while... >>> >>> --andrei >>> >>> 2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others. >>> >>> That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement. >>> >>> Kaili >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Maureen Hilyard >>> To: Holly Raiche >>> Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM >>> Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS >>> >>> +1 Holly >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: >>> Folks >>> >>> Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. >>> Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context. >>> >>> If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue. >>> >>> If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them! >>> >>> If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task. >>> >>> In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card. >>> >>> Holly >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: >>> >>>> I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity. >>>> >>>> The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB) >>>> >>>> As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse). >>>> >>>> According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization. >>>> >>>> I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman. >>>> >>>> Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views? >>>> >>>> Alan >>>> >>>> >>>>> From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> >>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 >>>>> To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> >>>>> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS >>>>> >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. >>>>> >>>>> Bernard Turcotte >>>>> ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 >>>>> >>>>> For Fiona and Rafik. >>>>> >>>>> DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Preamble: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Summary of Responses from Public Comments: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • Total of 15 comments >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 6 had no comments on an office of diversity >>>>> • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel >>>>> • 3 supported an office of diversity >>>>> • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • Breakdown by major categories >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 4 had no comments >>>>> • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 2 Governments: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity >>>>> • 1 supported an office of diversity >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 6 Individuals/Associations: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity >>>>> • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel >>>>> • 2 supported an office of diversity >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Establishment of an office of diversity >>>>> >>>>> 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Required Actions: >>>>> >>>>> The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" >>>>> Content-Disposition: attachment; >>>>> filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" >>>>> X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 >>>>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: >>>>> 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG >>>>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: >>>>> ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== >>>>> >>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>>> Content-Disposition: inline >>>>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: >>>>> 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG >>>>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: >>>>> ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Ws2-diversity mailing list >>>>> Ws2-diversity@icann.org >>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity >>>> <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ >>>> ALAC mailing list >>>> ALAC@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+(ALA...) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC@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+(ALA...) >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC@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+(ALA...) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC@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+(ALA...) >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Andrey Kolesnikov >>> RIPN.NET >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC@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+(ALA...) >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC@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+(ALA...) > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC@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+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
Thanks for the info, Dev. If that's the case, IMO we should appreciate but not applaud the decision. Diversity is still a worthwhile goal, but it is best spread by culture and leadership rather than bureaucracy. ALAC is and has been one of the most diverse communities within ICANN (consider, for instance, our pioneering use of language interpretation long before most other volunteer communities -- including, suprisingly, the GAC) and yet we are still striving for better. Perhaps we have something to offer (so long as the result of this offer is not compelled volunteer labour :-P ) IMO there is nothing wrong in taking this opportunity to remind of the value (and values) we bring to ICANN. Heaven knows there are plenty who would take any opportunity to put us down.... Cheers, - Evan On 16 February 2018 at 13:45, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote:
As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability- diversity-26oct17/attachments/20180116/539b3dfe/ICANNBoardComments- WS2Diversity-0001.pdf
saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints.
Dev Anand
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea.
As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated:
'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’
(Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche < h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/ pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct- ws2-draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP
PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
Preamble:
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
Summary of Responses from Public Comments:
• Total of 15 comments
• 6 had no comments on an office of diversity • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel • 3 supported an office of diversity • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
• Breakdown by major categories
• 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
• 4 had no comments • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
• 2 Governments:
• 1 had no comments on an office of diversity • 1 supported an office of diversity
• 6 Individuals/Associations:
• 1 had no comments on an office of diversity • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel • 2 supported an office of diversity
Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments:
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
Required Actions:
The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/ iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTigha GdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/ iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTigha GdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
+1 Evan On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:48 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Thanks for the info, Dev.
If that's the case, IMO we should appreciate but not applaud the decision.
Diversity is still a worthwhile goal, but it is best spread by culture and leadership rather than bureaucracy. ALAC is and has been one of the most diverse communities within ICANN (consider, for instance, our pioneering use of language interpretation long before most other volunteer communities -- including, suprisingly, the GAC) and yet we are still striving for better. Perhaps we have something to offer (so long as the result of this offer is not compelled volunteer labour :-P )
IMO there is nothing wrong in taking this opportunity to remind of the value (and values) we bring to ICANN. Heaven knows there are plenty who would take any opportunity to put us down....
Cheers, - Evan
On 16 February 2018 at 13:45, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote:
As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability-divers ity-26oct17/attachments/20180116/539b3dfe/ICANNBoardComments -WS2Diversity-0001.pdf
saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints.
Dev Anand
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea.
As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated:
'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’
(Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche < h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail /comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2- draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
> From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 > To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> > Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS > > All, > > As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. > > Bernard Turcotte > ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 > > For Fiona and Rafik. > > DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP > > > > > PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS > > > > Preamble: > > > > The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. > > > > Summary of Responses from Public Comments: > > > • Total of 15 comments > > > • 6 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel > • 3 supported an office of diversity > • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. > > > • Breakdown by major categories > > > • 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): > > > • 4 had no comments > • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity > > > • 2 Governments: > > > • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 1 supported an office of diversity > > > • 6 Individuals/Associations: > > > • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel > • 2 supported an office of diversity > > > > > > Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: > > > > 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. > > 2. Establishment of an office of diversity > > 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. > > > > Required Actions: > > The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. > > > > Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" > Content-Disposition: attachment; > filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" > X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bw S/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTig haGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: > ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6 QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cX Bw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bw S/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTig haGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: > ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6 QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cX Bw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-diversity mailing list > Ws2-diversity@icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada
Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
I agree with Evan. We shouldn't have to make rules for diversity when it should be part of ICANN's makeup. We don't have to do this in APRALO and it works for us! On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 5:20 PM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote:
+1 Evan
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:48 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Thanks for the info, Dev.
If that's the case, IMO we should appreciate but not applaud the decision.
Diversity is still a worthwhile goal, but it is best spread by culture and leadership rather than bureaucracy. ALAC is and has been one of the most diverse communities within ICANN (consider, for instance, our pioneering use of language interpretation long before most other volunteer communities -- including, suprisingly, the GAC) and yet we are still striving for better. Perhaps we have something to offer (so long as the result of this offer is not compelled volunteer labour :-P )
IMO there is nothing wrong in taking this opportunity to remind of the value (and values) we bring to ICANN. Heaven knows there are plenty who would take any opportunity to put us down....
Cheers, - Evan
On 16 February 2018 at 13:45, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote:
As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability-divers ity-26oct17/attachments/20180116/539b3dfe/ICANNBoardComments -WS2Diversity-0001.pdf
saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints.
Dev Anand
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea.
As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated:
'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’
(Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche < h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg < alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
> I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity. > > The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB) > > As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17 oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse). > > According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-dr aft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization. > > I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman. > > Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views? > > Alan > > >> From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> >> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 >> To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> >> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS >> >> All, >> >> As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. >> >> Bernard Turcotte >> ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 >> >> For Fiona and Rafik. >> >> DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP >> >> >> >> >> PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS >> >> >> >> Preamble: >> >> >> >> The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. >> >> >> >> Summary of Responses from Public Comments: >> >> >> • Total of 15 comments >> >> >> • 6 had no comments on an office of diversity >> • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel >> • 3 supported an office of diversity >> • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. >> >> >> • Breakdown by major categories >> >> >> • 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): >> >> >> • 4 had no comments >> • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity >> >> >> • 2 Governments: >> >> >> • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity >> • 1 supported an office of diversity >> >> >> • 6 Individuals/Associations: >> >> >> • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity >> • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel >> • 2 supported an office of diversity >> >> >> >> >> >> Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: >> >> >> >> 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. >> >> 2. Establishment of an office of diversity >> >> 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. >> >> >> >> Required Actions: >> >> The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. >> >> >> >> Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" >> Content-Disposition: attachment; >> filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" >> X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 >> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: >> 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bw S/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTig haGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG >> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: >> ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6 QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cX Bw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> Content-Disposition: inline >> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: >> 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bw S/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTig haGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG >> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: >> ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6 QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cX Bw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ws2-diversity mailing list >> Ws2-diversity@icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity > <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________
> ALAC mailing list > ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada
Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
I agree with Maureen in that ICANN and the community should come up ways and means of ensuring that Diversity is a part of its processes and also support programs such as the Intercultural program which supports and encourages Diversity. Diversity should be a part of ICANN but does not necessarily need a dedicated office in order to do that. Beran Sent from my iPhone
On 16 Feb 2018, at 20:48, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Thanks for the info, Dev.
If that's the case, IMO we should appreciate but not applaud the decision.
Diversity is still a worthwhile goal, but it is best spread by culture and leadership rather than bureaucracy. ALAC is and has been one of the most diverse communities within ICANN (consider, for instance, our pioneering use of language interpretation long before most other volunteer communities -- including, suprisingly, the GAC) and yet we are still striving for better. Perhaps we have something to offer (so long as the result of this offer is not compelled volunteer labour :-P )
IMO there is nothing wrong in taking this opportunity to remind of the value (and values) we bring to ICANN. Heaven knows there are plenty who would take any opportunity to put us down....
Cheers, - Evan
On 16 February 2018 at 13:45, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote: As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability-diversity-26oct17/atta...
saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints.
Dev Anand
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea.
As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated:
'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’
(Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000... ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi... ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
> From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 > To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> > Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS > > All, > > As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. > > Bernard Turcotte > ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 > > For Fiona and Rafik. > > DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP > > > > > PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS > > > > Preamble: > > > > The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. > > > > Summary of Responses from Public Comments: > > > • Total of 15 comments > > > • 6 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel > • 3 supported an office of diversity > • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. > > > • Breakdown by major categories > > > • 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): > > > • 4 had no comments > • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity > > > • 2 Governments: > > > • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 1 supported an office of diversity > > > • 6 Individuals/Associations: > > > • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel > • 2 supported an office of diversity > > > > > > Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: > > > > 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. > > 2. Establishment of an office of diversity > > 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. > > > > Required Actions: > > The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. > > > > Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" > Content-Disposition: attachment; > filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" > X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: > ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: > ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-diversity mailing list > Ws2-diversity@icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALA...)
+1. It is always good to remind ourselves what we have wrought! And you have an that ability to unerringly hit the spot. CAS ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Thanks for the info, Dev.
If that's the case, IMO we should appreciate but not applaud the decision.
Diversity is still a worthwhile goal, but it is best spread by culture and leadership rather than bureaucracy. ALAC is and has been one of the most diverse communities within ICANN (consider, for instance, our pioneering use of language interpretation long before most other volunteer communities -- including, suprisingly, the GAC) and yet we are still striving for better. Perhaps we have something to offer (so long as the result of this offer is not compelled volunteer labour :-P )
IMO there is nothing wrong in taking this opportunity to remind of the value (and values) we bring to ICANN. Heaven knows there are plenty who would take any opportunity to put us down....
Cheers, - Evan
On 16 February 2018 at 13:45, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote:
As a FYI, the ICANN Board responded during the public comment period last month http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-accountability-divers ity-26oct17/attachments/20180116/539b3dfe/ICANNBoardComments -WS2Diversity-0001.pdf
saying that the office will not be established given lack of consensus and budget constraints.
Dev Anand
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:
I am with Holy and Alan on this one, i.e. when it comes to additional ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘budget’ that would have to be reserved for an OOD. So I too think setting up such an office is not a good idea.
As a fyi, with regard to ‘diversity’ as a theme within ICANN, I can only reiterate myself. When a couple of us worked on a draft statement re the CCWG WS2 ‘Enhancing Accountability - Recommendations for Diversity’ report last December, I a.o. stated:
'I too am convinced ‘diversity’ is a good and important thing to strive for. But it is not a goal in itself as far as I am concerned - I could not care less whether someone is black or blue or what her/his sexual orientation might be. Without going into detail, (the first half of) this draft is the most political correct piece of windowdressing material I have come across in a long time. Simply put, IMO, its reads as a plea for ‘diversity for the sake of diversity and let’s focus on that in stead of what ICANN’s missions tells us to’. Emphasised by a large amount of supposedly ‘factual’ statements without basis/underlying sources.’
(Obviously that was a personal point of view. I then left it to others to suggest comments and I stayed ’neutral’)
On 14 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not disfavor measures like “affirmative action” to attain better balanced workplaces, leadership positions and governmental contexts (In fact, I think representative democracy, in order to truly be representative must sometimes force such representativity with measures that force gender balance. There is good evidence that “affirmative action” measures can balance out many structural and societal obstacles that tend to predetermine male-dominated scenarios, even there are highly qualified women around and available. http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-
However, in this particular context I agree with the line of thinking in this thread, particularly as espoused by Holly and Alan, since it is in no way a critique of diversity itself as a positive end, it’s an objection to the way ICANN is structuring the means to that end, which seems to be impracticable and perhaps counterproductive. Why not put scarce ICANN dollars in more outreach geared at female stakeholders, or perhaps supporting spouses of male stakeholders (in return for active Community participation) instead of more bureaucratic/organizational layers? 2 Cents.
Javier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 14, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> wrote:
OMG! Holly, Alan, +1. Please keep me out from keyboard for a while...
--andrei
2018-02-14 20:46 GMT+03:00 Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com>: Hi,
I fully agree with the comments initiated by Alan and the points by Maureen, Holly and others.
That is, ALAC should issue a statement against establishing this office. I believe comments of Holly, Maureen and others would suffice as the main body of the statement.
Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: Maureen Hilyard To: Holly Raiche Cc: ALAC ; Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:19 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
+1 Holly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Holly Raiche < h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote: Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail /comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2- draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
> From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 > To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> > Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS > > All, > > As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. > > Bernard Turcotte > ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 > > For Fiona and Rafik. > > DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP > > > > > PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS > > > > Preamble: > > > > The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. > > > > Summary of Responses from Public Comments: > > > • Total of 15 comments > > > • 6 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel > • 3 supported an office of diversity > • 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. > > > • Breakdown by major categories > > > • 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): > > > • 4 had no comments > • 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity > > > • 2 Governments: > > > • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 1 supported an office of diversity > > > • 6 Individuals/Associations: > > > • 1 had no comments on an office of diversity > • 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel > • 2 supported an office of diversity > > > > > > Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: > > > > 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. > > 2. Establishment of an office of diversity > > 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. > > > > Required Actions: > > The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. > > > > Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" > Content-Disposition: attachment; > filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" > X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bw S/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTig haGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: > ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6 QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cX Bw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bw S/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTig haGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: > ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6 QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cX Bw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-diversity mailing list > Ws2-diversity@icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada
Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
I agree Holly. Diversity should be managed by standards, not by a group of people. It would be like the inquisition. We designate a woman as ALAC Chair, and that group will tell us: you CAN NOT, you must appoint a man ???? It would be very simple that there are two lines where the different types of diversity are described, in the order in which they should be taken into account for the designations. Of course it should be headed by knowledge, the qualifications for that task. This for all ICANN, and we would save a lot of money. Regards Alberto De: ALAC [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Holly Raiche Enviado el: martes, 13 de febrero de 2018 10:07 p.m. Para: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> CC: ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS Importancia: Alta Folks Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context. If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue. If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them! If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task. In short, I support Alan's comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card. Holly On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > wrote: I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity. The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB) As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000 008.html <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/00 0008.html> ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse). According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-diversi ty-26oct17-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-draft-recs-divers ity-26oct17-en.pdf> ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization. I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman. Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views? Alan From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com <mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org <mailto:ws2-diversity@icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS All, As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 For Fiona and Rafik. DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS Preamble: The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity. Summary of Responses from Public Comments: * Total of 15 comments * 6 had no comments on an office of diversity * 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel * 3 supported an office of diversity * 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity. * Breakdown by major categories * 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report): * 4 had no comments * 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity * 2 Governments: * 1 had no comments on an office of diversity * 1 supported an office of diversity * 6 Individuals/Associations: * 1 had no comments on an office of diversity * 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel * 2 supported an office of diversity Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: 1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations. 2. Establishment of an office of diversity 3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work. Required Actions: The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued. Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EW y2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c +glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+LxH4sZOpA5H5EW y2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c +glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg== _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-diversity@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity <Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:ALAC@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+(ALA C) --- El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Yes indeed. On point. Big +1 -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:07 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
Folks
Part of me absolutely supports any moves that support diversity. At one point in my life, I headed up the Equal Opportunity Unit in the Aust. Broadcasting Corporation so diversity was my job. Putting that aside, I have serious doubts about the concept in this context.
If they talking about just ICANN staff, there is already an ICANN HR function that would (or should) be charged with addressing the issue.
If they talking about the various organisations that attend the SOs/ACs? I have even more concern. Just for starters, it is up to each SO/AC - and then individual members within each SO/AC as to who participates. Is ICANN seriously going to tell GAC members that some of them must send more women representatives/more Asian members/more members from non-English speaking backgrounds? And who is going to tell each registry/registrar whom they can send to represent them!
If the idea is to have diversity in the make-up of ICANN committees, I would hope the first basis for selection is qualifications for the task.
In short, I support Alan’s comments. If the concept is diversity WITHIN ICANN staff, it is covered by HR. Otherwise, I have real doubts about the concept, other than - at best -it could be just a score card.
Holly
On 14 Feb 2018, at 11:18 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I would like to call your attention to this paper that was just circulated by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 on Diversity.
The ALAC was silent on the question of an Office of Diversity (OOD) that was mentioned in the draft recommendations (see https://community.icann.org/x/Z5tEB)
As important as diversity is, I find it troublesome that ICANN might be dedicating more bureaucracy to it. As I noted in my recent comments on the Specific Reviews Operating Standards ( https://mm.icann.org/ pipermail/comments-reviews-standards-17oct17/2018q1/000008.html ), I find that for the best of reasons, ICANN is building more and more complex process, rules and bureaucracy. At a time when it is clear we are going to have increasing budget constraint, this must be controlled. If we consider issues such as this as sacred , then we will see more and more other more discretionary budgets cut (and I am predicting that if we don't change our philosophy, budget issues will get MUCH worse).
According to the original recommendations document ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct- ws2-draft-recs-diversity-26oct17-en.pdf ): The role of this office would be to independently support, record and keep track of issues including complaints from the community on diversity issues within the organization.
I presume that by "organization" the document means all of ICANN (ICANN Organization as the staff are now known, the volunteer community and the Board). For ICANN Organization, I see this as falling directly under Human Resources and the Complaints Officer. For the volunteer part of ICANN, and the Board, I think it quite reasonable to keep records but that does not warrant a staffed office. Selection of volunteers is not done centrally, and complaints presumably should go to the Ombudsman.
Should the ALAC issue a further statement on this? And if so, what are your views?
Alan
From: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:28:23 -0500 To: ws2-diversity <ws2-diversity@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity - PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS
All,
As promised at the last meeting of the diversity sub-group please find below and attached the document prepared by Fiona and Rafik on this topic.
Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
For Fiona and Rafik.
*DIVERISTY SUB-GROUP *
*PAPER ON OFFICE OF DIVERSITY PUBLIC COMMENTS *
*Preamble: *
The Diversity sub-group presented a report for public comments that presented diversity at ICANN identified by a number of elements by which diversity may be characterized, measured and reported. The report was informed by feedback from ICANN Supporting Organization(SO)/Advisory Committee (AC)/groups through a Diversity Questionnaire. In the report the Sub-group proposes a number of recommendations by which ICANN may define, measure, report, support and promote diversity. It also indicated that there was a lack of consensus on the establishment on an office of diversity and sought to receive public comments on the position of the office of diversity.
*Summary of Responses from Public Comments: *
- Total of 15 comments
- 6 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 3 supported an office of diversity - 3 rejected the notion of an office of diversity.
- Breakdown by major categories
- 7 SO/ACs/Board (those which will have to approve the WS2 final report):
- 4 had no comments - 3 Rejected the notion of an office of diversity
- 2 Governments:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 1 supported an office of diversity
- 6 Individuals/Associations:
- 1 had no comments on an office of diversity - 3 supported an office of diversity or a panel - 2 supported an office of diversity
*Summary of Positions relating to the OOD from Public Comments: *
1. Establishment of an office of diversity or a panel similar to what is proposed in the Ombuds recommendations.
2. Establishment of an office of diversity
3. Rejection of an office of diversity in favour of staff performing this work.
*Required Actions: * The Sub-group on diversity does not have one solid position from the public comments but has instead received a number of options that need to be discussed further and weighed in order to determine how oversight of diversity can be pursued.
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf" X-Attachment-Id: f_jdkm12g20 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+ LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+ A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:5Mxd449bwS/HOp/iuqOwk4pTsHsOLwp4Urd2lAQC+ LxH4sZOpA5H5EWy2W2rBs7gToTighaGdY2nGhYw4nbnkMhHj+ A5OHljcCMG4yzy5c5s6+66WnCi//rOuNRtAQcG X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ApKEtrCYhRKl3UPpOM0fLBOZkaTcY6QwBeeGtAqZw+OgOzfrvYEk+ AotEDu2+rNWAMq6958Jvp+c+glyW7W4EQn8cXBw9UBrowrCZ+ P5ytgQVR8nbfFnqRajG4VJuLLwZc6022IzI09Frtk3p2uxpg==
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
<Office Of Diversity OptionsV1.2.pdf>______________ _________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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+(ALAC)
participants (13)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Alberto Soto -
Andrei Kolesnikov -
Bastiaan Goslings -
Beran Dondeh -
Carlton Samuels -
Dev Anand Teelucksingh -
Evan Leibovitch -
Holly Raiche -
Javier Rua -
Kan Kaili -
Maureen Hilyard -
Vanda Scartezini