Hi, Thanks to Nick and Hiro for their edits. As to Nick’s question: the GRC discussed the possible response and the initial approach was that while it is a good idea to entrust experts with selecting the panellists, the community needs to have control over the process. However, currently I have no time to work on it. We need to think about it properly, not just write something. ICANN org should follow the procedure. If we get the letter out, other groups might support it. Therefore, I would suggest removing the reference to the specific ccNSO interest. The matter and the principle of adhering to the proper procedure is important for all groups. Also, do we really need to quote the questions from the blog post? If they do not remember them, they can always re-read the blog ☺ Thanks, ]{atrina From: Nick Wenban-Smith <Nick.Wenban-Smith@nominet.uk> Date: Monday, 8 April 2019 at 18:10 To: Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz>, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: "ccnso-council@icann.org" <ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] Should blogs ask for community feedback? Hi Katrina Agreed. It’s very strange to launch this via a blog. I have suggested a little more background in the letter (effectively what you put in your email explaining the issue). Assuming they don’t reissue the questions and a response is therefore due by 15 April, do we need to have a plan to get a response in? Best Nick From: Ccnso-council <ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jordan Carter Sent: 07 April 2019 21:27 To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] Should blogs ask for community feedback? Dear Katrina This looks like a good issue to raise and I think that the draft letter does that effectively. Thank you! Cheers Jordan On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 06:02, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote: Dear Colleagues, As we learnt, on 9 March, right before the official start of the ICANN week, in his blog post Göran issued a “call to action” (see: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/independent-review-process-standing-panel-ca...) asking for community input on a set of questions about the selection and qualification of standing panellists that need to be selected to the Standing Panel to review disputes under Independent Review Process. Deadline for submitting comments is 15 April. Why is it important for ccTLDs: although the disputes exclude “Claims relating to ccTLD delegations and re-delegations;”, they cover, e.g. “[disputes that] arose from claims involving rights of the EC as set forth in the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws”, “Claims that ICANN, the Board, individual Directors, Officers or Staff members have not enforced ICANN's contractual rights with respect to the IANA Naming Function Contract” or “Claims regarding PTI service complaints by direct customers of the IANA naming functions that are not resolved through mediation”. I think we all agree that the community should be able to participate in the discussion on, e.g. qualifications of these panellists or the principles according to which those panellists are selected. If you look at the comments under the blog post, some of community members have already expressed their “surprise” that such important questions are asked in a blog post, circumventing public comments procedure. Please note, the Policy Department was not aware of this “call to action” either; therefore, it has not been included in the ICANN Community Leadership Digest (that’s the summary email I forward to you periodically). The idea of the Digest was that we have all the incoming requests in one place. It is impossible to monitor all channels to make sure we’re not missing anything. Blog posts should not be used to seek community input on something as important as implementation of structures described in the Bylaws. To avoid similar situations in the future and to ensure we and other parts of our community 1) know about calls and 2) have enough time to prepare feedback, I propose that we send a letter in which we also call to action: re-launch the consultation according to proper procedure and use only one channel for gathering feedback. If you agree, here is a draft. Your input is very much needed (do your magic)! https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O9NGDIv-UGqCtANMvesgR6T9mn1lLtd2XqzQsSV8... We do not have much time for this one. Would be nice if we could finalise it my Wednesday, 10 April. Have a nice weekend, ]{atrina _______________________________________________ Ccnso-council mailing list Ccnso-council@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccnso-council -- Jordan Carter Group Chief Executive, InternetNZ +64-21-442-649 Sent on the run, apologies for brevity