All, Being new, I can't really think of a reason to want a closed section. However, I can imagine that much depends on the answer to the question: "closed to whom"? Would such a section be accessible for ccNSO members only? Or council members only? Or working group members only? Best regards, Roelof Meijer CEO SIDN | Utrechtseweg 310 | 6812 AR | P.O.Box 5022 | 6802 EA - Arnhem | The Netherlands T +31 26 352 55 00 | M +31 611 39 57 75 Sent through my mobile device Op 26 jan. 2011 om 15:20 heeft "Gabriella Schittek" <gabriella.schittek@icann.org<mailto:gabriella.schittek@icann.org>> het volgende geschreven: Dear Councillors, As per yesterday’s discussion on the Council call, I’m sending you some information about the closed website section: * When conducting interviews with the community on the new website, it was mentioned several times that there is a wish for a closed section. To follow up on this, a small survey was conducted before the Cartagena meeting. Only 7 replies were received, however, 6 of the respondents indicated that they would wish to see some kind of closed section on the website. * Most frequently mentioned was the wish to be able to discuss Working Group issues on the closed website. However, it was also mentioned that a closed section would be useful for voting or for sharing sensitive data, such as statistics, financial reports or for setting up an “Address book” (where contact details of community members, presenters etc. could be listed). So, the Council needs to decide: 1. Should there be closed sections at all 2. If so: What sections should be closed (only Working Group sections, or also more general sections, containing information such as an Address Book, statistics etc.) 3. Who should have access To point 3: In case the Council decides to close some of the page with general information, the definition, which currently is used by the ccTLD community email list for granting email list access, could be used - namely: “ccTLD Managers, administrative contacts and technical contacts of ccTLDs; Staff and board members of ccTLD registries, as approved by the ccTLD Manager or administrative contact; Observers from Regional ccTLD registry organisations, identified by their manager or board; The ccNSO secretariat, the ICANN ccNSO Policy Support Officer and the IANA ccTLD Liaison Officer.” (see Community email list charter: <http://www.ccnso.icann.org/about/charter-cctld-community-list.pdf> http://www.ccnso.icann.org/about/charter-cctld-community-list.pdf) - other solutions are of course also possible. Regarding implementing a closed section: ICANN has introduced a new tool called Confluence, which is a type of Wiki (a website that allows the creation and editing of pages by those invited to the space). It seems that this tool could support most of the wishes which we received for a closed website. Confluence pages can either be open for everyone, or closed to certain groups. This means that, for instance, working group members could receive passwords for “their” working group and only they can access that space (we have, in fact, already been trying to use this for some working groups with another wiki called Socialtext - but it was not very popular – perhaps due the fact that it wasn’t very user friendly). Confluence also allows for “message board” functions (where participants can leave short comments on topics/documents discussed) and it can be set up so that those who wish receive email alerts of the activities. Once a Working Group is closed, its Wiki space can be archived, if wished for. Furthermore, Confluence can also support some voting functions (keeping the voter anonymous to the community, but open to the manager of the space). So it doesn’t seem that there will be much extra work needed to create closed sections, in case you think this is the way to go. Kind regards, Gabi