September 2020 - ATRT3-implementation-shepherds

FW: Follow up from ATRT3 implementation shepherd call with the ATRT3 Board Caucus
by Larisa B. Gurnick 01 Oct '20

01 Oct '20

Hello all, I hope that this note finds you all doing well. Just following up on the note below. In regards to the first item noted below, “Draft documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns”, have you had a chance to confirm what our team has assembled on your behalf, and would you like us to submit it to the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group on your behalf? The document is attached here for your convenience. I know that you are still in the process of discussing the second item noted below – your input on the principles and the proposed effectiveness framework. We appreciate your thoughtful consideration of this item and look forward to your input, when you are able to provide it. Thank you, Larisa From: ATRT3-implementation-shepherds <atrt3-implementation-shepherds-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of "Larisa B. Gurnick" <larisa.gurnick(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, September 18, 2020 at 6:04 AM To: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org" <atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> Cc: Leon Sanchez <leon.sanchez(a)board.icann.org>, Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org> Subject: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] Follow up from ATRT3 implementation shepherd call with the ATRT3 Board Caucus Hello Adetola, Cheryl, Daniel, Pat, Sébastien and Vanda, Thank you for your active and engaged participation and productive contributions toward the discussion on 8 September with the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group. We would like to follow up on two items from this discussion. DRAFT Documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns In response to several questions from the Board<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt3-implementation-shepherds/2020-Septembe…>, at your suggestion, the ATRT3 support staff assembled the attached documentation “DRAFT Documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns.” This report provides a summary of points throughout ATRT3 face-to-face and virtual plenary meetings where public comments on the Draft ATRT3 report were referenced or discussed. ICANN org assembled this information based upon the public record which can be found on the ATRT3 wiki<https://community.icann.org/display/atrt/ATRT3>. This information is not intended to be an analysis of ATRT3’s assessment of public comments or work. Please review the attached documentation and confirm that it is what you had in mind to address some of the Board’s questions. Please let us know if there are additional documents that you would like to share with the Board. After your confirmation and approval, we will forward the documentation to the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group. Question for ATRT3 implementation shepherds’ consideration During the 8 September call, we noted one question where you indicated that additional thought and consideration on your part would be needed. · Question 10: The Board developed a draft proposal, “Resourcing and Prioritization of Community Recommendations: Draft Proposal for Community Discussion” [icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draf…>, in consultation with the ATRT3 leadership as well as the leadership of all other community-led reviews. It was published in October 2019. The draft proposal suggests principles for effective recommendations, along with a table that offers a proposed effectiveness framework for assessing the effectiveness of a given recommendation. To what extent was the ATRT3 able to use this framework as guidance for developing recommendations? What aspects were useful and what aspects posed difficulties? How would the ATRT3 implementation shepherds suggest adjusting the principles and the proposed effectiveness framework? Once you have had a chance to think about the last portion of the above question, the Board Caucus would appreciate your input and views. The recording from the 8 September call will soon be available on the Implementation shepherd wiki page<https://community.icann.org/display/atrt/ATRT3+Implementation+Shepherds>; in the meantime, you can listen to it here [drive.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/drive.google.com/file/d/1S3y7lC2zYg5kLKZ…>. As the Board continues its consideration of the ATRT3 recommendations, there may be additional follow up questions or clarifications; we will continue to keep you informed of such developments. Thank you again for your diligent work and help with this part of the ATRT3 review process. Best wishes, Larisa

2 1

Re: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation shepherds doc
by Brenda Brewer 28 Sep '20

28 Sep '20

Good day all, Please see wiki here<https://community.icann.org/x/BYM4C> for the Zoom replay of the ATRT3 Implementation Shepherds discussion call held 23 September 2020. Transcript will be posted upon receipt, approximately 3-5 business days. Many thanks! Brenda From: ATRT3-implementation-shepherds <atrt3-implementation-shepherds-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM To: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org" <atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> Subject: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation shepherds doc Hi everyone, Here is the link to the Google doc I just created for your use – let me know if you have any problems with access: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UEZPGec9tD84eWuHhFGZ2y_YH6NkOCFRvG1kV9K… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1UEZPGec9tD84…> Brenda will send a quick note around once the recording is posted to the wiki. We’ll look forward to hearing from you wrt setting up a follow-up meeting next week. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Associate Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org

2 1

ATRT3 implementation shepherds doc
by Jennifer Bryce 24 Sep '20

24 Sep '20

Hi everyone, Here is the link to the Google doc I just created for your use – let me know if you have any problems with access: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UEZPGec9tD84eWuHhFGZ2y_YH6NkOCFRvG1kV9K… Brenda will send a quick note around once the recording is posted to the wiki. We’ll look forward to hearing from you wrt setting up a follow-up meeting next week. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Associate Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org

3 2

Our call tomorrow and request to review preparatory material,
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr 23 Sep '20

23 Sep '20

In advance of our meetup tomorrow I thought it may be of use if we looked to the Question 10 issue first as that requires perhaps more discussion time... obviously we will assume we have all refamiliarised ourselves with the Boards draft proposal in preparation... So after basic admin to start off the call lets start with *firstly a discourse regarding what adjustments (if any) to the principles outlined in the proposal or the effectiveness framework... With the aim of starting to create a response to the specific questions posed by the Board Caucus:* - To what extent was the ATRT3 able to use this framework as guidance for developing recommendations? - What aspects were useful and what aspects posed difficulties? - How would the ATRT3 implementation shepherds suggest adjusting the principles and the proposed effectiveness framework? For your ease of reference, the full text of Question 10 reads:-: The Board developed a draft proposal, “Resourcing and Prioritization of Community Recommendations: Draft Proposal for Community Discussion” <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-proposal-resourcing-commu…>, in consultation with the ATRT3 leadership as well as the leadership of all other community-led reviews. It was published in October 2019. The draft proposal suggests principles for effective recommendations, along with a table that offers a proposed effectiveness framework for assessing the effectiveness of a given recommendation. To what extent was the ATRT3 able to use this framework as guidance for developing recommendations? What aspects were useful and what aspects posed difficulties? How would the ATRT3 implementation shepherds suggest adjusting the principles and the proposed effectiveness framework? The *secondary Agenda item is of course our opinion and comments on the list of ATRT3 discussions of Public Comments that has been generated.* I have copied this document into a google doc and your invitation to comment etc., should be accessed from the following link, please use suggestion mode to make comments etc., let me know if you can;t get access... https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y-bloEdb7sBuVQCAxRdhgpSLkyBm6VrqhafBYVY… OK that will do for now I think, catch up soon on Zoom, at 2100 UTC ... <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_m…> Cheryl Langdon-Orr about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_m…>

3 2

Doodle Update may need to add a couple more time slot options.
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr 22 Sep '20

22 Sep '20

Quick update we have all polled now BUT.... Pat can only make 1 time slot, and that is the only time slot SeB is unavailable for, so I have asked Pat if there are additional times we might add to see if we can all gather before I close the poll...I will keep you posted and ask you to edit options if Pat has any time bands that work for him this week or even early next... Be great to sort this out by no later end of today... if no additional options from Pat, then Seb is there any chance you can change anything to be available at the Wed 23rd 2100 time slot? All feedback is appreciated <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_m…> Cheryl Langdon-Orr about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_m…>

2 3

Follow up from ATRT3 implementation shepherd call with the ATRT3 Board Caucus
by Larisa B. Gurnick 21 Sep '20

21 Sep '20

Hello Adetola, Cheryl, Daniel, Pat, Sébastien and Vanda, Thank you for your active and engaged participation and productive contributions toward the discussion on 8 September with the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group. We would like to follow up on two items from this discussion. DRAFT Documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns In response to several questions from the Board<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt3-implementation-shepherds/2020-Septembe…>, at your suggestion, the ATRT3 support staff assembled the attached documentation “DRAFT Documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns.” This report provides a summary of points throughout ATRT3 face-to-face and virtual plenary meetings where public comments on the Draft ATRT3 report were referenced or discussed. ICANN org assembled this information based upon the public record which can be found on the ATRT3 wiki<https://community.icann.org/display/atrt/ATRT3>. This information is not intended to be an analysis of ATRT3’s assessment of public comments or work. Please review the attached documentation and confirm that it is what you had in mind to address some of the Board’s questions. Please let us know if there are additional documents that you would like to share with the Board. After your confirmation and approval, we will forward the documentation to the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group. Question for ATRT3 implementation shepherds’ consideration During the 8 September call, we noted one question where you indicated that additional thought and consideration on your part would be needed. · Question 10: The Board developed a draft proposal, “Resourcing and Prioritization of Community Recommendations: Draft Proposal for Community Discussion” <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-proposal-resourcing-commu…> , in consultation with the ATRT3 leadership as well as the leadership of all other community-led reviews. It was published in October 2019. The draft proposal suggests principles for effective recommendations, along with a table that offers a proposed effectiveness framework for assessing the effectiveness of a given recommendation. To what extent was the ATRT3 able to use this framework as guidance for developing recommendations? What aspects were useful and what aspects posed difficulties? How would the ATRT3 implementation shepherds suggest adjusting the principles and the proposed effectiveness framework? Once you have had a chance to think about the last portion of the above question, the Board Caucus would appreciate your input and views. The recording from the 8 September call will soon be available on the Implementation shepherd wiki page<https://community.icann.org/display/atrt/ATRT3+Implementation+Shepherds>; in the meantime, you can listen to it here<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3y7lC2zYg5kLKZgnLdSOnOXLMPFxZvB/view?usp=…>. As the Board continues its consideration of the ATRT3 recommendations, there may be additional follow up questions or clarifications; we will continue to keep you informed of such developments. Thank you again for your diligent work and help with this part of the ATRT3 review process. Best wishes, Larisa

3 5

Re: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] Follow up from ATRT3 implementation shepherd call with the ATRT3 Board Caucus
by Vanda Scartezini 18 Sep '20

18 Sep '20

Thank you Larissa for your feedback. Have a nice weekend. Kisses 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: ATRT3-implementation-shepherds <atrt3-implementation-shepherds-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of "Larisa B. Gurnick" <larisa.gurnick(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, September 18, 2020 at 10:04 To: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org" <atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> Cc: Leon Sanchez <leon.sanchez(a)board.icann.org>, Theresa SWINEHART <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org> Subject: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] Follow up from ATRT3 implementation shepherd call with the ATRT3 Board Caucus Hello Adetola, Cheryl, Daniel, Pat, Sébastien and Vanda, Thank you for your active and engaged participation and productive contributions toward the discussion on 8 September with the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group. We would like to follow up on two items from this discussion. DRAFT Documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns In response to several questions from the Board<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt3-implementation-shepherds/2020-Septembe…>, at your suggestion, the ATRT3 support staff assembled the attached documentation “DRAFT Documentation of ATRT3 Handling of Public Comments & ATRT3 Member Concerns.” This report provides a summary of points throughout ATRT3 face-to-face and virtual plenary meetings where public comments on the Draft ATRT3 report were referenced or discussed. ICANN org assembled this information based upon the public record which can be found on the ATRT3 wiki<https://community.icann.org/display/atrt/ATRT3>. This information is not intended to be an analysis of ATRT3’s assessment of public comments or work. Please review the attached documentation and confirm that it is what you had in mind to address some of the Board’s questions. Please let us know if there are additional documents that you would like to share with the Board. After your confirmation and approval, we will forward the documentation to the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group. Question for ATRT3 implementation shepherds’ consideration During the 8 September call, we noted one question where you indicated that additional thought and consideration on your part would be needed. · Question 10: The Board developed a draft proposal, “Resourcing and Prioritization of Community Recommendations: Draft Proposal for Community Discussion” <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-proposal-resourcing-commu…> , in consultation with the ATRT3 leadership as well as the leadership of all other community-led reviews. It was published in October 2019. The draft proposal suggests principles for effective recommendations, along with a table that offers a proposed effectiveness framework for assessing the effectiveness of a given recommendation. To what extent was the ATRT3 able to use this framework as guidance for developing recommendations? What aspects were useful and what aspects posed difficulties? How would the ATRT3 implementation shepherds suggest adjusting the principles and the proposed effectiveness framework? Once you have had a chance to think about the last portion of the above question, the Board Caucus would appreciate your input and views. The recording from the 8 September call will soon be available on the Implementation shepherd wiki page<https://community.icann.org/display/atrt/ATRT3+Implementation+Shepherds>; in the meantime, you can listen to it here<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3y7lC2zYg5kLKZgnLdSOnOXLMPFxZvB/view?usp=…>. As the Board continues its consideration of the ATRT3 recommendations, there may be additional follow up questions or clarifications; we will continue to keep you informed of such developments. Thank you again for your diligent work and help with this part of the ATRT3 review process. Best wishes, Larisa

1 0

Re: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group
by DANIEL NANGHAKA 08 Sep '20

08 Sep '20

Dear Team, Looking at the current situation, Vanda has explicitly explained the situation, for the radical changes I believe they have clearly been stated in the report. The questions from the ATRT3 Board Caucus group will shape the discussion or dialogue that we shall be having. Illustrations have been made and explicitly been documented and where clarity is needed, explanations will be made. @Vanda Scartezini <vanda(a)scartezini.org> , when the situation arises, the explanation that you have given here can be brought up. So we already have solutions. Daniel On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 17:08, < atrt3-implementation-shepherds-request(a)icann.org> wrote: > Send ATRT3-implementation-shepherds mailing list submissions to > atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt3-implementation-shepherds > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > atrt3-implementation-shepherds-request(a)icann.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > atrt3-implementation-shepherds-owner(a)icann.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ATRT3-implementation-shepherds digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: ATRT3 implementation shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 > Board Caucus Group (Vanda Scartezini) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 21:07:49 +0000 > From: Vanda Scartezini <vanda(a)scartezini.org> > To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr(a)gmail.com> > Cc: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org" > <atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation > shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group > Message-ID: <AE2733F3-F3D7-4FB6-8276-188CC51BB26C(a)scartezini.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > HI Cheryl, > Can do, but may use too much time. But to have a better organization, > better you or Pat to flag me and I will do, in order to not disrupt the > meeting. > We have too many question to answer and I do not know how long they plan > to stay with us? > > 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: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr(a)gmail.com> > Date: Monday, September 7, 2020 at 17:30 > To: Vanda Scartezini <vanda(a)scartezini.org> > Cc: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org" < > atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation > shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group > > Well said Vanda and I would encourage you to say it again in the call... > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2020, 06:12 Vanda Scartezini <vanda(a)scartezini.org<mailto: > vanda(a)scartezini.org>> wrote: > Dear friends > > Even not requested to comment the questions made by the Board caucus group > I would like to remember the response from Leon to the minority report > regarding Reviews: > > ?that there are significant differences between the recommendations that > we are including in the final report and what was commented by the > community. So this might be an issue at the time the board considers the > report, and what I'm hearing is that there is some desire to further engage > with the community so that > > ICANN | Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) Report | > May 2020 | 333 > > they are able to comment on these recommendations since, again, they seem > to be significantly different from those in which they were able to comment > during the public comment period. So I just want to flag this because it > might be an issue when time comes for the board to consider these > recommendation. And I don't know if this calls for any public comment as > Daniel is signaling, but certainly, there needs to be some sort of > engagement with the community so that they are updated on these changes and > they are able maybe to comment on this, or at least be aware of these > differences, and then the board is able to consider rightfully these > recommendations.? We note for accuracy and completeness that Le?n S?nchez > further explained (at page 61 of the transcript) that his ?flagging this > issue does not equate to me requesting or pushing for another public > comment period, just to be clear.? > > From my view, I remember give all the time to our colleagues inside ATRT3 > to explain the reasons the group they represent, and in this regard I do > not see lack of opportunity to debate and take it back to their communities. > > For the other side, I believe we had the expectation, not possible indeed, > to have more interaction with the community, time to explain each point > better etc. The one year time, we were under, give us few opportunity to > get more feedback or even enough time to better explaining our proposal to > each community, especially those better served by the current situation > ,then more opposed to changes. > In my opinion it shall be consider, after the conclusion and ( we expect) > end of the pandemic situation, before any position against it, give some > opportunity to this interaction with groups, since in my view what they > were most afraid of was the expectation of doing the full work alone. > However, our proposals do allow the use of external consultants? > > Our proposal is a radical change no question on this. But we all agreed > there are huge dissatisfaction with the current solution on reviews among > the AC/SO, demanding too much time from the community, with not enough good > experiences and certainly high cost to ICANN.org. > Normally changes on the process anyone is used to is hard to be accepted > by all. But we have understood and the proposal itself offers a solution > for the questions raised. > Explain directly to those groups will be the real solution IMO. > 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: ATRT3-implementation-shepherds < > atrt3-implementation-shepherds-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto: > atrt3-implementation-shepherds-bounces(a)icann.org>> on behalf of Jennifer > Bryce <jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org<mailto:jennifer.bryce@icann.org>> > Date: Friday, September 4, 2020 at 09:33 > To: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org<mailto: > atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org>" < > atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org<mailto: > atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org>> > Cc: Leon Sanchez <leon.sanchez(a)board.icann.org<mailto: > leon.sanchez(a)board.icann.org>> > Subject: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation shepherds: > Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group > > Dear ATRT3 implementation shepherds, > > I hope this email finds you all well. Attached, please find questions from > the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group, intended to help focus the discussion during > your joint meeting on Tuesday, 8 September at 13:00 UTC. Written responses > are not requested. > > The ATRT3 Board Caucus Group is looking forward to the meeting. You can > find information on the makeup of the group here< > https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/board-caucus-membership-2019-06-27-en>. > The discussion will be publicly archived on the wiki< > https://community.icann.org/x/BYM4C>. > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > Best, > Jennifer > -- > Jennifer Bryce > Associate Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann > Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org<mailto:jennifer.bryce@icann.org> > > _______________________________________________ > ATRT3-implementation-shepherds mailing list > ATRT3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org<mailto: > ATRT3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt3-implementation-shepherds > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your > personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance > with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and > the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can > visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or > configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or > disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >

4 3

Re: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group
by Vanda Scartezini 07 Sep '20

07 Sep '20

Dear friends Even not requested to comment the questions made by the Board caucus group I would like to remember the response from Leon to the minority report regarding Reviews: “that there are significant differences between the recommendations that we are including in the final report and what was commented by the community. So this might be an issue at the time the board considers the report, and what I'm hearing is that there is some desire to further engage with the community so that ICANN | Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) Report | May 2020 | 333 they are able to comment on these recommendations since, again, they seem to be significantly different from those in which they were able to comment during the public comment period. So I just want to flag this because it might be an issue when time comes for the board to consider these recommendation. And I don't know if this calls for any public comment as Daniel is signaling, but certainly, there needs to be some sort of engagement with the community so that they are updated on these changes and they are able maybe to comment on this, or at least be aware of these differences, and then the board is able to consider rightfully these recommendations.” We note for accuracy and completeness that León Sánchez further explained (at page 61 of the transcript) that his “flagging this issue does not equate to me requesting or pushing for another public comment period, just to be clear.” From my view, I remember give all the time to our colleagues inside ATRT3 to explain the reasons the group they represent, and in this regard I do not see lack of opportunity to debate and take it back to their communities. For the other side, I believe we had the expectation, not possible indeed, to have more interaction with the community, time to explain each point better etc. The one year time, we were under, give us few opportunity to get more feedback or even enough time to better explaining our proposal to each community, especially those better served by the current situation ,then more opposed to changes. In my opinion it shall be consider, after the conclusion and ( we expect) end of the pandemic situation, before any position against it, give some opportunity to this interaction with groups, since in my view what they were most afraid of was the expectation of doing the full work alone. However, our proposals do allow the use of external consultants… Our proposal is a radical change no question on this. But we all agreed there are huge dissatisfaction with the current solution on reviews among the AC/SO, demanding too much time from the community, with not enough good experiences and certainly high cost to ICANN.org. Normally changes on the process anyone is used to is hard to be accepted by all. But we have understood and the proposal itself offers a solution for the questions raised. Explain directly to those groups will be the real solution IMO. 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: ATRT3-implementation-shepherds <atrt3-implementation-shepherds-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, September 4, 2020 at 09:33 To: "atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org" <atrt3-implementation-shepherds(a)icann.org> Cc: Leon Sanchez <leon.sanchez(a)board.icann.org> Subject: [ATRT3-implementation-shepherds] ATRT3 implementation shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group Dear ATRT3 implementation shepherds, I hope this email finds you all well. Attached, please find questions from the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group, intended to help focus the discussion during your joint meeting on Tuesday, 8 September at 13:00 UTC. Written responses are not requested. The ATRT3 Board Caucus Group is looking forward to the meeting. You can find information on the makeup of the group here<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/board-caucus-membership-2019-06-27-en>. The discussion will be publicly archived on the wiki<https://community.icann.org/x/BYM4C>. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Associate Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org

2 3

ATRT3 implementation shepherds: Questions from ATRT3 Board Caucus Group
by Jennifer Bryce 07 Sep '20

07 Sep '20

Dear ATRT3 implementation shepherds, I hope this email finds you all well. Attached, please find questions from the ATRT3 Board Caucus Group, intended to help focus the discussion during your joint meeting on Tuesday, 8 September at 13:00 UTC. Written responses are not requested. The ATRT3 Board Caucus Group is looking forward to the meeting. You can find information on the makeup of the group here<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/board-caucus-membership-2019-06-27-en>. The discussion will be publicly archived on the wiki<https://community.icann.org/x/BYM4C>. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Associate Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org

3 2