Steve, can I echo Paul and say excellent work. We're in the midst of end of year here before the summer and I'll be travelling and away largely from this Saturday til 12 January, but will do what I can in that time. Speak with you this evening and apologies I could not contribute more to this first couple of days of work. best, Jordan On 15 December 2014 at 15:05, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
I've been unfortunately absent from this discussion. Excellent work Steve
P
***NOTE: OUR NEW ADDRESS -- EFFECTIVE 12/15/14 ****
509 C St. NE
Washington, DC 20002
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com>
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
Skype: +1 (202) 738-1739 or paul.rosenzweig1066
Link to my PGP Key <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article...>
*From:* Steve DelBianco [mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org] *Sent:* Sunday, December 14, 2014 5:05 PM *To:* ccwg-accountability2@icann.org *Subject:* [Area 2] Updated draft 3 for Work Area 2
In this draft, I have merely re-arranged the accountability suggestions, into 3 sections:
1. Mechanisms to give the community authority over the ICANN corporation
2. Mechanisms to prescribe or restrict actions of the ICANN corporation
3. Mechanisms to ensure transparency of the ICANN corporation and the broader community
I presume staff will post this version to our Wiki so that all CCWG colleagues can review before our call on Tuesday. Both a pdf and Word doc are attached.
--Steve
On 12/12/14, 8:30 PM, "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> wrote:
Thanks to Malcolm Hutty for his edits today. And thanks to Marika Konings for sharing a staff summary <https://community.icann.org/x/nCbxAg> of accountability proposals taken from the public comment period. This made our job much easier.
That staff document had about 250 ideas. I skipped those focusing on IANA functions since that is out of our CCWG scope. I skipped items that were just comments on current accountability. About 100 of the items were consolidated into the second draft of our deliverable (attached).
Our current draft list is very manageable, at under 2 pages. Mathieu suggests we eventually add tags so that related items can be grouped together (e.g., "Checks and Balances", "Review", Redress", etc.)
Per a question from Mathieu, I propose this rationale to designate whether in work stream 1 or 2:
Work Stream 1 is designated for accountability enhancements that must be in-place or firmly committed before IANA transition occurs. All other items are Work Stream 2, provided there are mechanisms in WS1 adequate to force implementation of WS2 items despite resistance from ICANN management and board.
How does that sound to you?
Please review and comment over the weekend, so we can send to our colleagues on Monday morning. Feel free to add accountability mechanisms that were suggested earlier this year, even if outside of ICANN's public comment forum.
As I noted earlier, we are tasked now just to give a starting point of accountability enhancement suggestions. Our entire CCWG will surely develop more enhancements over the course of our work.
--Steve
On 12/12/14, 5:08 AM, "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> wrote:
Thanks for volunteering to help with Work Area 2: to Review Input from Public Comment and Categorize Items into Work Streams 1 & 2.
Our deliverable (by Monday) is a list of items that have been suggested, and identify whether these belong in WS1 or WS2.
As our rapporteur, I drafted a format that might be useful to our working group colleagues. And I filled-in about a page of items to show how this format could work. (attached)
There are around 70 comments in the two comment periods we need to examine. Not every comment includes suggested accountability mechanisms. The process I recommend is:
First, scan the comment and for any accountability suggestion,and see if there's already a similar item in the list/table. If so, add the comment source under the Source column (Google, BC, etc.) If not in the list yet, add the row and the source.
Second, Indicate whether this accountability item should be required before the IANA contract is relinquished (WS1). If it can wait until after transition, it goes into Work Stream 2 (WS2)
Finally, add a hyperlink to the comment at the bottom of our document, so readers can find it easily.
Make sense? Now, how to divide the work?
I suggest that Paul Rosenzweig, Jordan Carter, and I go thru the 53 submissions in the Public comments on enhancing ICANN Accountability <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-enhancing-accountability-06may14/>, 7-May thru 30-Jul, 2014.
Could we have a few others volunteer to go thru the second set of comments? There are 21 submissions in the Public comments on enhancing ICANN Accountability <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-enhancing-accountability-06sep14/index...>, 6-Sep thru 13-Oct, 2014
Ideas welcome!
--
Steve DelBianco
Executive Director
NetChoice
http://www.NetChoice.org <http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org
+1.202.420.7482
On 12/11/14, 5:11 AM, "Grace Abuhamad" <grace.abuhamad@icann.org> wrote:
*Work Area 2: Review Input from Public Comment and Categorize Items into Work Streams 1 & 2*
Deliverable: list of items that have been suggested and identify whether these belong in WS1, WS2 or both.
*Coordinator/Rapporteur*: Steve DelBianco
Volunteers:
- Jordan Carter - Leon Sanchez
Wiki Link: https://community.icann.org/x/YoMQAw
Mailing list address: ccwg-accountability2@icann.org
Public Archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability2/
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-accountability2 mailing list Ccwg-accountability2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability2
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ* 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter *To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.*