Dear Lesley, Leonid, Fahd, Mathieu, Giovanni, all,
Thank you for your thoughts, many valid points were made.
I propose one of the two following approaches:
·
At least for the time being, the SOP suspends its work on strategic and operational plans and budgets.
·
I draft a letter to Xavier along the lines I suggested, to which I add that the SOP suspends its work pending a satisfactory response
to that message. I will circulate the draft among you for your input
·
When the letter is finalized, I will send it to Xavier, cc’ing Fadi, Chris and Mike
·
We await a response and upon that, decide on further action
Alternatively: as above, but it is the ccNSO Council that sends the above letter to ICANN’s CEO and Board.
What do you all think?
Cheers, Roelof
From: Lesley Cowley [mailto:lesley@nominet.org.uk]
Sent: donderdag 12 september 2013 15:38
To: Roelof Meijer; 'ccnso-sopcommittee@icann.org'
Cc: 'ccnso-council@icann.org'
Subject: Re: [ccnso-sopcommittee] FW: [community-finance] FY14 Draft Operating Plan & Budget - Report of Public Comments
Hi,
I share the frustrations!
It is understandably a tempting option for us to resign/withdraw etc., but although that might result in some brief satisfaction, I do not feel that this would
best serve the interests of the ccTLD community.
The SOP committee and the ccNSO have together gained a great reputation for feedback on ICANN's strategic and operational plans and strategies (or lack of them).
We should not lightly throw away the opportunity to continue in this capacity. Although I imagine that news of withdrawal might make life easier for some of the people on the receiving end of our feedback, it would leave us without a clear route for ccNSO
inputs in the future.
From my point of view, I think that we need to think both tactically and strategically about how to ensure that our inputs are not lightly brushed off or even
ignored going forward.
One approach might be something similar to that we took at the ICANN, Nairobi meeting in response to the former ICANN CEO's initial comments regarding the security
of the DNS to the GAC - Council and SOP members may recall that we reached a similar peak of frustration and we produced a ccNSO statement that was made public, supported by others etc, read out at various opportunities. This seemed to be very effective in
gaining community and industry media attention and achieving our goals at that time.
Kind regards,
Lesley
Lesley Cowley, OBE
CEO
Nominet
Minerva House
Edmund Halley Road
Oxford Science Park
Oxford, OX4 4DQ
UK
Tel: +44-(0)-1865-332211
Twitter: @lesleycowley
From:
Roelof Meijer <roelof.meijer@sidn.nl>
Date: Thursday, 12 September 2013 11:44
To: "'ccnso-sopcommittee@icann.org'" <ccnso-sopcommittee@icann.org>
Cc: ccNSO Council <ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: [ccnso-sopcommittee] FW: [community-finance] FY14 Draft Operating Plan & Budget - Report of Public Comments
Dear SOP members,
Please find below Xavier Calvez’s email, introducing the revised Report of Public Comments on the Draft FY14 Ops Plan and Budget.
For your convenience (it is not that easy to find), I attach ICANN’s summary comments on the community’s comments.
Under reference #99 to #112, you will find ICANN’s reaction to the comments the SOP submitted in June.
And a frustrating summary, it is.
Two examples of what you will come across reading the document:
·
On our comment that the FY 14 ops Plan & Budget lacks measurable goals (a comment that was widely echoed by the community during the
Durban meeting and that we have made repeatedly in the past), ICANN reacts with the statement that “metrics and deliverables are continuously being developed”. I can only qualify that as a silly response: how can the budget and ops plan have been approved
(last month) if deliverables and metrics are still being developed?
·
On our comment that the rationale behind a 23.8% increase in expenses for ICANN operations has to be clarified, the reaction is a two
sentence reference to a new strategic planning process. Which comes not even close to a rationale..
It is quite clear to me that we as SOP WG spend more brainpower and time on our comments, than ICANN spends on its reaction. Faced with that conclusion,
I cannot help wondering if there’s any point in continuing to call on you all to spent that brainpower and time on future ICANN Ops Plans, Budgets and Strategic Plans.
I intend to send Xavier a message containing roughly the above, but would welcome your thoughts first.
Cheers, Roelof
PS: for your information, I also attach the approved FY14 Plan and Budget
From:
community-finance-bounces@icann.org [mailto:community-finance-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of ICANN-Controller
Sent: donderdag 5 september 2013 18:35
To: Xavier J. Calvez; community-finance@icann.org;
jcurran@arin.net;
dmaher@pir.org; Maya S. Reynolds; pdiaz@pir.org; Drazek, Keith; Adams, Michael D.; Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund;
chris@andalucia.com;
tonyarholmes@btinternet.com; Elisa Cooper; Paul Wilson; Lynn Gravel; Byron Holland
Cc: Susie Johnson; ICANN-Controller; Anjali Vaswani
Subject: [community-finance] FY14 Draft Operating Plan & Budget - Report of Public Comments
Dear SO/AC/SG Leaders and ICANN Finance Community Members,
We are pleased to announce that the revised Report of Public Comment has been posted. This revision includes replies to
comments received during the initial public comment period as well as the period during which the public comments were re-opened to allow for comments on the budget revisions presented in Durban. Please visit the following link to review the report.
http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/op-budget-fy14-10may13-en.htm
Regards,
ICANN Finance Team