Hi Everyone, A few months back, we sent a communication concerning the CIP-CCG. There has been an ongoing conversation on the principles. As it stands tonight, the current wording is The SO, AC, or NomCom is fulfilling its purpose. The structures of SO, AC, or NomCom are effective. The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are efficient. The SO, AC, or NomCom is accountable internally to its stakeholders and substructures (where applicable), and externally to the wider ICANN community in benefit of the global Internet population. The SO, AC, or NomCom collaborates to further the mission of ICANN and the effectiveness of the ICANN multistakeholder model. When we communicated to you last time, they were as follows. I have made them lighter for editorial purposes. The SO, AC, or NomCom is fulfilling its purpose. The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are effective. The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are efficient. The SO, AC, or NomCom is accountable internally to its stakeholders, and externally to the wider ICANN community. The ICANN community collaborates to further the mission of ICANN and the effectiveness of the ICANN multistakeholder model. There is some tension around Principle 4, though the belief remains that this is a velvet glove methodology. Specifically see principle 4 as an aspiration more than an actionable requirement. Interpreting this way would mean that our internal accountability remains and that we can happily harmonize with ICANN’s mission. Chris and Irina, please way in if you feel the need to. If there is a concern by a council member, or the council in general, that the continued evolution of the principles would be a negative impact to the ccNSO, please let us know. Regards, Sean
On Jul 12, 2024, at 16:31, Sean Copeland via Ccnso-council <ccnso-council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear fellow council members,
I've attached a presentation related to the CIP-CCG cross-community group. Please review it and respond with any questions or comments. I believe it will be on our agenda for Thursday.