FW: Report to Council in terms of CCWG Charter
Dear Colleagues, As I am sure you are aware, the CCWG is conducting face to face meetings today and tomorrow in Paris (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778863 ). They have a significant amount of work to get through and appear to have tried to streamline some of it by modifying a standard process. One of our representatives, Dr. Eberhard Lisse, has raised an objection to this process modification at the meeting. He also requested that I share is concerns with the Council. Please see his concerns in the email below. Best regards, Byron -----Original Message----- From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse [mailto:el@lisse.NA] Sent: July 17, 2015 3:23 AM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca> Cc: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; Keith NZ <keith@internetnz.net.nz>; Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Report to Council in terms of CCWG Charter Byron, please bring the below to the attention of Council members, as I can not post to the Council List In terms of the Charter I wish request an opportunity to discuss with the Chair of the chartering organization or your designated representatives that the Co-Chairs of the CCWG Accountability have decided to declare the Face to Face Meeting here in Paris TWO meetings, in order to be able to read issues on which there is consensus in the room, twice. I have raised in the room (and had on the mailing list while in transit) because 1) it was sprung on us by the Co-Chairs late, while most attending where in fact in transit instead of being decided by the members in two readings (well) in advance; and 2) it is an unheard of attempt at circumventing the two reading rule; and 3) the call for this F2F was short notice when many members already had made other arrangements, such as vacation; some of them now being represented by individuals not having previously participated in the CCWG, I for one do not even know the ccNSO alternate Maarten Simon. There are however at least 23 members and/or alternates present in the room as I write this. I objected against it for the record, as the sole objector. greetings, el
As a participant in the CCWG who was not able (for various reasons) to be present in person, I am very surprised that this is happening. I do share many of Eberhard's serious concerns about process in the CCWG, though I would not express them in the same way he does. No ICANN associated group should be seen to be bending rules, after the excoriation meted out to ICANN by the IRP on .AFRICA recently. And this behaviour seems exclusionary to me - the CCWG participants and members present in Paris seem to be in a privileged position to push through some agenda over remote participants such as I, and others. Nigel Roberts On 17/07/15 13:41, Byron Holland wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As I am sure you are aware, the CCWG is conducting face to face meetings today and tomorrow in Paris (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778863 ). They have a significant amount of work to get through and appear to have tried to streamline some of it by modifying a standard process.
One of our representatives, Dr. Eberhard Lisse, has raised an objection to this process modification at the meeting. He also requested that I share is concerns with the Council.
Please see his concerns in the email below.
Best regards, Byron
-----Original Message----- From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse [mailto:el@lisse.NA] Sent: July 17, 2015 3:23 AM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca> Cc: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; Keith NZ <keith@internetnz.net.nz>; Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Report to Council in terms of CCWG Charter
Byron,
please bring the below to the attention of Council members, as I can not post to the Council List
In terms of the Charter I wish request an opportunity to discuss with the Chair of the chartering organization or your designated representatives that the Co-Chairs of the CCWG Accountability have decided to declare the Face to Face Meeting here in Paris TWO meetings, in order to be able to read issues on which there is consensus in the room, twice.
I have raised in the room (and had on the mailing list while in transit) because
1) it was sprung on us by the Co-Chairs late, while most attending where in fact in transit instead of being decided by the members in two readings (well) in advance; and
2) it is an unheard of attempt at circumventing the two reading rule; and
3) the call for this F2F was short notice when many members already had made other arrangements, such as vacation; some of them now being represented by individuals not having previously participated in the CCWG, I for one do not even know the ccNSO alternate Maarten Simon.
There are however at least 23 members and/or alternates present in the room as I write this.
I objected against it for the record, as the sole objector.
greetings, el
Hi Byron, Thanks for the information. To assist my understanding, could someone give a bit more info on a purely factual basis on the standard process & the actual modification that is being made (and who approved it/using which process was the change made) please? Thanks, Lesley On 17 Jul 2015, at 13:41, Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As I am sure you are aware, the CCWG is conducting face to face meetings today and tomorrow in Paris (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778863 ). They have a significant amount of work to get through and appear to have tried to streamline some of it by modifying a standard process.
One of our representatives, Dr. Eberhard Lisse, has raised an objection to this process modification at the meeting. He also requested that I share is concerns with the Council.
Please see his concerns in the email below.
Best regards, Byron
-----Original Message----- From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse [mailto:el@lisse.NA] Sent: July 17, 2015 3:23 AM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca> Cc: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; Keith NZ <keith@internetnz.net.nz>; Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Report to Council in terms of CCWG Charter
Byron,
please bring the below to the attention of Council members, as I can not post to the Council List
In terms of the Charter I wish request an opportunity to discuss with the Chair of the chartering organization or your designated representatives that the Co-Chairs of the CCWG Accountability have decided to declare the Face to Face Meeting here in Paris TWO meetings, in order to be able to read issues on which there is consensus in the room, twice.
I have raised in the room (and had on the mailing list while in transit) because
1) it was sprung on us by the Co-Chairs late, while most attending where in fact in transit instead of being decided by the members in two readings (well) in advance; and
2) it is an unheard of attempt at circumventing the two reading rule; and
3) the call for this F2F was short notice when many members already had made other arrangements, such as vacation; some of them now being represented by individuals not having previously participated in the CCWG, I for one do not even know the ccNSO alternate Maarten Simon.
There are however at least 23 members and/or alternates present in the room as I write this.
I objected against it for the record, as the sole objector.
greetings, el
Dear Lesley, all, The Co-Chairs of the CCWG decided to propose that the Paris meeting be deemed two meetings in accordance with the internal decision process for the CCWG, as described in and based on the CCWG Charter. This was done so in order that the path of iterative consensus building could be pursued over these two meetings. As only one objection to this decision was received, this position was declared, in accordance with the CCWG Charter. Kind regards, Bart On 17/07/15 15:09, "owner-ccnso-council@icann.org on behalf of Lesley Cowley" <owner-ccnso-council@icann.org on behalf of lesley-cowley@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Hi Byron,
Thanks for the information.
To assist my understanding, could someone give a bit more info on a purely factual basis on the standard process & the actual modification that is being made (and who approved it/using which process was the change made) please?
Thanks,
Lesley
On 17 Jul 2015, at 13:41, Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
As I am sure you are aware, the CCWG is conducting face to face meetings today and tomorrow in Paris (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778863 ). They have a significant amount of work to get through and appear to have tried to streamline some of it by modifying a standard process.
One of our representatives, Dr. Eberhard Lisse, has raised an objection to this process modification at the meeting. He also requested that I share is concerns with the Council.
Please see his concerns in the email below.
Best regards, Byron
-----Original Message----- From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse [mailto:el@lisse.NA] Sent: July 17, 2015 3:23 AM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca> Cc: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; Keith NZ <keith@internetnz.net.nz>; Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Report to Council in terms of CCWG Charter
Byron,
please bring the below to the attention of Council members, as I can not post to the Council List
In terms of the Charter I wish request an opportunity to discuss with the Chair of the chartering organization or your designated representatives that the Co-Chairs of the CCWG Accountability have decided to declare the Face to Face Meeting here in Paris TWO meetings, in order to be able to read issues on which there is consensus in the room, twice.
I have raised in the room (and had on the mailing list while in transit) because
1) it was sprung on us by the Co-Chairs late, while most attending where in fact in transit instead of being decided by the members in two readings (well) in advance; and
2) it is an unheard of attempt at circumventing the two reading rule; and
3) the call for this F2F was short notice when many members already had made other arrangements, such as vacation; some of them now being represented by individuals not having previously participated in the CCWG, I for one do not even know the ccNSO alternate Maarten Simon.
There are however at least 23 members and/or alternates present in the room as I write this.
I objected against it for the record, as the sole objector.
greetings, el
participants (4)
-
Bart Boswinkel -
Byron Holland -
Lesley Cowley -
Nigel Roberts