REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
Dear all, As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC. Kind regards, Emily From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020] Dear all, Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result. Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter<https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below). We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today). Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received. Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today). We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards, Erika and Ching Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation: In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations: a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.
Hi Emily The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree" Maureen On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this *Thursday, 28 May at **23:59 UTC**.*
Kind regards,
Emily
*From: *Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> *Date: *Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 *To: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Cc: *Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas < emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below). *We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
*Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, **you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (**21 days from today). **Minority statements may be included in an annex **to the Final Report or linked from **the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received**.*
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. *If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the* *email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
We hope you are all well, take good care and,
kind regards,
Erika and Ching
*Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:*
*In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:*
*a)* * Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection*
*b)* * Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree*
*In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
That language is from the charter so not sure we can revise it at this stage. On 5/25/2020 10:35:49 AM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Emily The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree" Maureen On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org [mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org]> wrote: Dear all, As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC. Kind regards, Emily From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com [mailto:erika@erikamann.com]> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org]> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com [mailto:ching.chiao@gmail.com]>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org [mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org]>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org]>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org [mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org]> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020] Dear all, Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here [https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20Proceeds%20-%20Final%20Survey%20on%20Mechanisms%20-%20Summary.xlsx?version=1&modificationDate=1588328283000&api=v2]). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result. Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter [https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter] for details, an excerpt of which is included below). We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today). Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received. Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today). We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards, Erika and Ching Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation: In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations: a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org [mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds [https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds] _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy]) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos]). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
James, Indeed, it's from the Charter, We can't remove it Maureen. Is there something else we can do to accommodate your concerns? Kind regards, Erika On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 11:48 AM James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote:
That language is from the charter so not sure we can revise it at this stage.
On 5/25/2020 10:35:49 AM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this *Thursday, 28 May at **23:59 UTC* *.*
Kind regards,
Emily
*From: *Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> *Date: *Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 *To: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Cc: *Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas < emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below). *We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
*Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, **you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (**21 days from today). **Minority statements may be included in an annex **to the Final Report or linked from **the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received**.*
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. *If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the* *email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
We hope you are all well, take good care and,
kind regards,
Erika and Ching
*Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:*
*In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:*
*a)* * Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection*
*b)* * Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree*
*In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you Erika As long as that independent panel remains, Im as good with the rest of the report as I can be without rehashing everything all over again which I wouldn't want to wish on anybody.. Many thanks for all your work on this Maureen On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:51 PM Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> wrote:
James, Indeed, it's from the Charter, We can't remove it Maureen. Is there something else we can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Erika
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 11:48 AM James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote:
That language is from the charter so not sure we can revise it at this stage.
On 5/25/2020 10:35:49 AM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this *Thursday, 28 May at **23:59 UTC* *.*
Kind regards,
Emily
*From: *Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> *Date: *Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 *To: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Cc: *Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas < emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below). *We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
*Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, **you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (**21 days from today). **Minority statements may be included in an annex **to the Final Report or linked from **the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received**.*
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. *If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the* *email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
We hope you are all well, take good care and,
kind regards,
Erika and Ching
*Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:*
*In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:*
*a)* * Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection*
*b)* * Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree*
*In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you Maureen! Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2020, at 12:01 PM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you Erika
As long as that independent panel remains, Im as good with the rest of the report as I can be without rehashing everything all over again which I wouldn't want to wish on anybody..
Many thanks for all your work on this Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:51 PM Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> wrote: James, Indeed, it's from the Charter, We can't remove it Maureen. Is there something else we can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Erika
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 11:48 AM James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote: That language is from the charter so not sure we can revise it at this stage.
On 5/25/2020 10:35:49 AM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote: Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC.
Kind regards,
Emily
From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter for details, an excerpt of which is included below). We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received.
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards,
Erika and Ching
Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:
In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:
a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree
In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Judith, Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change. As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree: “The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ” Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns? Kind regards, Emily From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> Organisation: Hellerstein & Associates Reply to: "judith@jhellerstein.com" <judith@jhellerstein.com> Date: Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements HI Emily, I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A. So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference? Thanks Best, Judith _________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com<mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: Hi Emily The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree" Maureen On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org<mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>> wrote: Dear all, As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC. Kind regards, Emily From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com<mailto:erika@erikamann.com>> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com<mailto:ching.chiao@gmail.com>>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org<mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020] Dear all, Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result. Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter<https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below). We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today). Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received. Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today). We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards, Erika and Ching Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation: In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations: a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you for being able to accept this, Judith! Wishing you a good day, Erika On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 5:51 PM Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> wrote:
HI Emily,
Thanks so much for your clarification. It does help. I guess like Maureen I am resigned to accepting the consensus definition as it is what is in the charter and we cannot go back to change things now.
Thanks again to you, Erika, and Ching for all your great work on this document
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 11:02 AM, Emily Barabas wrote:
Hi Judith,
Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change.
As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree:
“The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ”
Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards,
Emily
*From: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> *Organisation: *Hellerstein & Associates *Reply to: *"judith@jhellerstein.com" <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> *Date: *Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 *To: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
HI Emily,
I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen
If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A.
So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference?
Thanks
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________
Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...>
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...>
Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there.
If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this *Thursday, 28 May at **23:59 UTC**.*
Kind regards,
Emily
*From: *Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> *Date: *Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 *To: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Cc: *Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas < emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below). *We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
*Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, **you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (**21 days from today). **Minority statements may be included in an annex **to the Final Report or linked from **the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received**.*
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. *If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the* *email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
We hope you are all well, take good care and,
kind regards,
Erika and Ching
*Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:*
*In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:*
*a)* * Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection*
*b)* * Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree*
*In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Replying here to not fork the thread. My oft-repeated preference for community expertise instead of org has a number of people who also liked it. Is it captured in any of the other comments (I have made sure it was on the record at all previous junctures). Do I need to do so again? And if yes, note that I will be referring to the support this position had every time it was raised. We are now at the point of significant CCWG volunteer fatigue and this race, again, goes to the marathoners. EN
On May 25, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> wrote:
HI Emily,
Thanks so much for your clarification. It does help. I guess like Maureen I am resigned to accepting the consensus definition as it is what is in the charter and we cannot go back to change things now.
Thanks again to you, Erika, and Ching for all your great work on this document
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com <http://www.jhellerstein.com/> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 11:02 AM, Emily Barabas wrote:
Hi Judith,
Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change.
As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree:
“The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ”
Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Emily
From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> Organisation: Hellerstein & Associates Reply to: "judith@jhellerstein.com" <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> Date: Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
HI Emily,
I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen
If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A.
So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference?
Thanks
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org <mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>> wrote: Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC.
Kind regards, Emily
From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com <mailto:erika@erikamann.com>> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com <mailto:ching.chiao@gmail.com>>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org <mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below).We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received.
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards,
Erika and Ching
Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:
In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:
a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree
In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Interesting!
On 25 May 2020, at 17:46, elliot noss <enoss@tucows.com> wrote:
Replying here to not fork the thread.
My oft-repeated preference for community expertise instead of org has a number of people who also liked it. Is it captured in any of the other comments (I have made sure it was on the record at all previous junctures). Do I need to do so again? And if yes, note that I will be referring to the support this position had every time it was raised.
We are now at the point of significant CCWG volunteer fatigue and this race, again, goes to the marathoners.
EN
On May 25, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com>> wrote:
HI Emily,
Thanks so much for your clarification. It does help. I guess like Maureen I am resigned to accepting the consensus definition as it is what is in the charter and we cannot go back to change things now.
Thanks again to you, Erika, and Ching for all your great work on this document
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com <http://www.jhellerstein.com/> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 11:02 AM, Emily Barabas wrote:
Hi Judith,
Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change.
As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree:
“The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ”
Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Emily
From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> Organisation: Hellerstein & Associates Reply to: "judith@jhellerstein.com" <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> Date: Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
HI Emily,
I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen
If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A.
So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference?
Thanks
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org <mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>> wrote: Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC.
Kind regards, Emily
From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com <mailto:erika@erikamann.com>> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com <mailto:ching.chiao@gmail.com>>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org <mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below).We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received.
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards,
Erika and Ching
Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:
In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:
a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree
In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
___________________ Adetola SOGBESAN, M.Sc. Inf. Sys. Mgt. (Liverpool) President Consulting |ICT4D | Internet Governance | Capacity Building www.chacesystems.com M: +234 802 290 4983|Twitter: @tolasogbesan|Skype: tola-act ___________________
Hi Elliot - good to hear from you! I believe we have taken your concerns into consideration and have implemented the core idea well -,respecting at the same time ICANN's parameters. Regarding evaluation and selection funding applications, recommendation 2 states: "The CCWG recommends that an Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel will be established. The Panel’s responsibility is to evaluate and select project applications. Neither the Board nor staff will be taking decisions on individual applications but the Board will instead focus its oversight on whether the rules of the process were followed by the Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel. Members of the Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel will not be selected based on their affiliation or representation, but will be selected based on their grant-making expertise, ability to demonstrate independence over time, and relevant knowledge. Diversity considerations should also be taken into account in the selection process." Note that ICANN community members are not prohibited from serving on the panel, as long as they meet the other requirements and criteria. If you would like to submit a statement expressing a different viewpoint from recommendation 2, you can do so as a minority statement. This will be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received. Cheers, Erika On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 6:46 PM elliot noss <enoss@tucows.com> wrote:
Replying here to not fork the thread.
My oft-repeated preference for community expertise instead of org has a number of people who also liked it. Is it captured in any of the other comments (I have made sure it was on the record at all previous junctures). Do I need to do so again? And if yes, note that I will be referring to the support this position had every time it was raised.
We are now at the point of significant CCWG volunteer fatigue and this race, again, goes to the marathoners.
EN
On May 25, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> wrote:
HI Emily,
Thanks so much for your clarification. It does help. I guess like Maureen I am resigned to accepting the consensus definition as it is what is in the charter and we cannot go back to change things now.
Thanks again to you, Erika, and Ching for all your great work on this document
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 11:02 AM, Emily Barabas wrote:
Hi Judith,
Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change.
As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree:
“The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ”
Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Emily
*From: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> *Organisation: *Hellerstein & Associates *Reply to: *"judith@jhellerstein.com" <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> *Date: *Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 *To: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
HI Emily,
I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen
If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A.
So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference?
Thanks
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________
Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...>
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...>
Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this *Thursday, 28 May at **23:59 UTC**.*
Kind regards, Emily
*From: *Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> *Date: *Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 *To: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Cc: *Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas < emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below).*We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
*Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, **you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (**21 days from today). **Minority statements may be included in an annex **to the Final Report or linked from **the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received**.*
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. *If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the* *email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards,
Erika and Ching
*Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:*
*In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:*
*a)* * Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection*
*b)* * Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree*
*In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
I guess that is close enough that a further dissent it not necessary. No need to rehash and thanks for all your hard work! EN
On May 26, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> wrote:
Hi Elliot -
good to hear from you!
I believe we have taken your concerns into consideration and have implemented the core idea well -,respecting at the same time ICANN's parameters.
Regarding evaluation and selection funding applications, recommendation 2 states:
"The CCWG recommends that an Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel will be established. The Panel’s responsibility is to evaluate and select project applications. Neither the Board nor staff will be taking decisions on individual applications but the Board will instead focus its oversight on whether the rules of the process were followed by the Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel. Members of the Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel will not be selected based on their affiliation or representation, but will be selected based on their grant-making expertise, ability to demonstrate independence over time, and relevant knowledge. Diversity considerations should also be taken into account in the selection process."
Note that ICANN community members are not prohibited from serving on the panel, as long as they meet the other requirements and criteria.
If you would like to submit a statement expressing a different viewpoint from recommendation 2, you can do so as a minority statement. This will be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received.
Cheers,
Erika
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 6:46 PM elliot noss <enoss@tucows.com <mailto:enoss@tucows.com>> wrote: Replying here to not fork the thread.
My oft-repeated preference for community expertise instead of org has a number of people who also liked it. Is it captured in any of the other comments (I have made sure it was on the record at all previous junctures). Do I need to do so again? And if yes, note that I will be referring to the support this position had every time it was raised.
We are now at the point of significant CCWG volunteer fatigue and this race, again, goes to the marathoners.
EN
On May 25, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com>> wrote:
HI Emily,
Thanks so much for your clarification. It does help. I guess like Maureen I am resigned to accepting the consensus definition as it is what is in the charter and we cannot go back to change things now.
Thanks again to you, Erika, and Ching for all your great work on this document
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com <http://www.jhellerstein.com/> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 11:02 AM, Emily Barabas wrote:
Hi Judith,
Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change.
As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree:
“The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ”
Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Emily
From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> Organisation: Hellerstein & Associates Reply to: "judith@jhellerstein.com" <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com> Date: Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
HI Emily,
I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen
If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A.
So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference?
Thanks
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org <mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>> wrote: Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this Thursday, 28 May at 23:59 UTC.
Kind regards, Emily
From: Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com <mailto:erika@erikamann.com>> Date: Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 To: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Cc: Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com <mailto:ching.chiao@gmail.com>>, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org <mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org>>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below).We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (21 days from today). Minority statements may be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received.
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the email list no later than 21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).
We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards,
Erika and Ching
Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:
In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:
a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree
In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you Elliot! I do appreciate this. Take care, Erika On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:54 PM elliot noss <enoss@tucows.com> wrote:
I guess that is close enough that a further dissent it not necessary. No need to rehash and thanks for all your hard work!
EN
On May 26, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> wrote:
Hi Elliot -
good to hear from you!
I believe we have taken your concerns into consideration and have implemented the core idea well -,respecting at the same time ICANN's parameters.
Regarding evaluation and selection funding applications, recommendation 2 states:
"The CCWG recommends that an Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel will be established. The Panel’s responsibility is to evaluate and select project applications. Neither the Board nor staff will be taking decisions on individual applications but the Board will instead focus its oversight on whether the rules of the process were followed by the Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel. Members of the Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel will not be selected based on their affiliation or representation, but will be selected based on their grant-making expertise, ability to demonstrate independence over time, and relevant knowledge. Diversity considerations should also be taken into account in the selection process."
Note that ICANN community members are not prohibited from serving on the panel, as long as they meet the other requirements and criteria.
If you would like to submit a statement expressing a different viewpoint from recommendation 2, you can do so as a minority statement. This will be included in an annex to the Final Report or linked from the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received.
Cheers,
Erika
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 6:46 PM elliot noss <enoss@tucows.com> wrote:
Replying here to not fork the thread.
My oft-repeated preference for community expertise instead of org has a number of people who also liked it. Is it captured in any of the other comments (I have made sure it was on the record at all previous junctures). Do I need to do so again? And if yes, note that I will be referring to the support this position had every time it was raised.
We are now at the point of significant CCWG volunteer fatigue and this race, again, goes to the marathoners.
EN
On May 25, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> wrote:
HI Emily,
Thanks so much for your clarification. It does help. I guess like Maureen I am resigned to accepting the consensus definition as it is what is in the charter and we cannot go back to change things now.
Thanks again to you, Erika, and Ching for all your great work on this document
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 11:02 AM, Emily Barabas wrote:
Hi Judith,
Thanks for your response and this additional input. As Erika mentioned in her response to Maureen, the definition of consensus is included in the charter, so this is not a definition we can change.
As a point of clarification, the consensus level designation refers specifically to the level of support for the text of the recommendations. The consensus level designation is not intended to directly reflect the results of the poll. Rather, the poll was a tool to inform drafting of the recommendation text. In the case of recommendation 1, “consensus” support means that the following is a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree:
“The CCWG recommends that the Board select either mechanism A or mechanism B for the allocation of auction proceeds, taking into account the preference expressed by CCWG members for mechanism A . . . ”
Does the above clarification address your concerns, and if not, can you kindly advise if there is something else the CCWG can do to accommodate your concerns?
Kind regards, Emily
*From: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> *Organisation: *Hellerstein & Associates *Reply to: *"judith@jhellerstein.com" <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> <judith@jhellerstein.com> *Date: *Monday, 25 May 2020 at 16:40 *To: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER - Deadline Thursday, 28 May - minority statements
HI Emily,
I agree with Maureen on this statement. I do not like the word Small in the definition. Is there another way to describe this as the definition in the charter of consensus is not what we have here? On all other recommendations we can use the word consensus but not on the mechanism chosen
If looking at the poll results. We see that 7 people voted for A, 4 for B and 3 for C so it seem that there were an equal number of votes for 'NOT" A as there were votes "FOR" A thus we cannot say a small majority disagree. We can only say that there was a preference for Mechanism A but that there was an equal preference for not A.
So we cannot say there is a consensus on the type of mechanism, we can say there is a preference?
Thanks
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________
Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com [jhellerstein.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com&d=D...>
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...>
Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 5/25/2020 5:35 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Emily
The more that I see the statement of "small minority", the more I cannot agree with the "small" being included there. If you are still asking, my vote goes to removing "small" from the consensus definition so that it reads "a position where a minority disagrees, but a majority agree"
Maureen
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:27 PM Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
As a reminder, if you would like to submit minority viewpoints (details below), the deadline to do so is this *Thursday, 28 May at **23:59 UTC* *.*
Kind regards, Emily
*From: *Erika Mann <erika@erikamann.com> *Date: *Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 15:42 *To: *Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Cc: *Ching Chiao <ching.chiao@gmail.com>, Emily Barabas < emily.barabas@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Fwd: Message for Erika to send to CCWG today [Subject: CCWG Auction Proceeds Consensus Call - Deadline 21 May 2020]
Dear all,
Thank you to those who participated in the final poll on mechanisms. Please find attached the Final Report reflecting results of the poll (see poll results in excel format here <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/126432332/CCWG%20Auction%20...>). With 15 members and 4 participants responding, poll results indicate strong support for mechanism A, followed by mechanism B with the majority of members supporting that the CCWG should recommend two mechanisms. Section 4.7 of the Report and Recommendation #1 have been updated to reflect this result.
Seeing that there were no additional comments on the last revision circulated, the leadership team now considers the Final Report complete. The next step in the process is for the Co-Chairs to make a designation of the level of consensus for the recommendations in the report (see charter <https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter> for details, an excerpt of which is included below).*We believe that the CCWG supports the recommendations in this report by Consensus. Consensus is defined as “a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree.” If you are a member of the CCWG and you disagree with this designation, please respond to the email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
*Please note that at this stage, we are not revisiting the substance of the recommendations or asking you to state your positions on specific recommendations. We are requesting a response only if you believe that the consensus designation is incorrect. If you would like to submit a minority viewpoint on the content of the recommendations, **you may do so, but this is separate from the consensus call. Minority statements will be due 28 May at 23:59 UTC (**21 days from today). **Minority statements may be included in an annex **to the Final Report or linked from **the Final Report to the wiki, depending on the length and number of statements received**.*
Please also find attached a draft cover letter to send to the Chartering Organizations with the Final Report. *If you have questions or comments on this draft letter, please send to the* *email list no later than **21 May at 23:59 UTC (14 days from today).*
We hope you are all well, take good care and, kind regards,
Erika and Ching
*Excerpt from the CCWG Charter regarding Consensus Designation:*
*In developing its output, work plan and any other reports, the CCWG shall seek to act by consensus. The chair(s) may make a call for Consensus. If making such a call they should always make reasonable efforts to involve all Chartering Organization appointed Members of the CCWG (or sub-teams, if applicable). The chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations:*
*a)* * Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection*
*b)* * Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree*
*In the absence of Full Consensus, the chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) by the Chartering Organization appointed members and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report.*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_p...>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_t...>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (7)
-
'Tola Sogbesan -
elliot noss -
Emily Barabas -
Erika Mann -
James Gannon -
Judith Hellerstein -
Maureen Hilyard