- comments-reviews-standards-17oct17@icann.org

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] Comment on Standards for ICANN Reviews
by Alejandro Pisanty Feb. 21, 2018

Feb. 21, 2018

To whom it may concern, please accept this comment as Public Comment on the Operating Standards for ICANN's Specific Reviews The process by which members of Review Teams and similar working groups and parties should be modified to allow the inclusion of volunteers recommended by the Board of Directors and other possible relevant instances outside the present process closed by the SO and AC leadership, in order to enable the introduction of opinions which may dissent from those in the SO and AC leadership. The process approved after the IANA transition has become too closed, as part of a trend to deprive the Board of some opportunities to take part in the activities of ICANN. As a result, the selection of reviewers has now become more political instead of less, and more liable instead of less to lead to a choice of "comfortable" reviewers at the expense of those who may find flaws and recommend changes in parts of ICANN other than the operational and managerial staff. To further aggravate the consequences of this change, the SO and AC leadership is not subject to the kind of stringent scrutiny the Board and staff are in terms of accountability, transparency, and conflicts of interest. The opportunities for situations commonly described as "circling the wagons", "you pat my back, I'll pat your back" and other irregularites are too high to leave untouched. ICANN will be affected by this paradoxal aspect of its institutional design as it will be described by others - some frankly inimical - as an organization which is too closed on itself; and may already be suffering the consequences of this design in the difficulties the SSR2 Review is finding. Additional disclosure, I have personally observed this in the SSR2 process, whereas the reviews including the first SSR which I had the honor to chair, based on ICANN's previous instiutional design were able to introduce strong critics of all involved ICANN parties and produce results whose beneficial consequences have been adopted over rather long periods. I would be most grateful if you included this note formally as submitted to the comment process, in time before the deadline, and if you could acknowledge receipt of this communication. Unfortunately I have not been able to submit it through the link provided on the website due to some configuration mismatches which will take some time and careful decisions on privacy to resolve. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] Comments submitted on behalf of Alejandro Pisanty
by Lars Hoffmann Feb. 21, 2018

Feb. 21, 2018

Dear Mr. Hofmann, please accept this comment as Public Comment on the Operating Standards for ICANN's Specific Reviews The process by which members of Review Teams and similar working groups and parties should be modified to allow the inclusion of volunteers recommended by the Board of Directors and other possible relevant instances outside the present process closed by the SO and AC leadership, in order to enable the introduction of opinions which may dissent from those in the SO and AC leadership. The process approved after the IANA transition has become too closed, as part of a trend to deprive the Board of some opportunities to take part in the activities of ICANN. As a result, the selection of reviewers has now become more political instead of less, and more liable instead of less to lead to a choice of "comfortable" reviewers at the expense of those who may find flaws and recommend changes in parts of ICANN other than the operational and managerial staff. To further aggravate the consequences of this change, the SO and AC leadership is not subject to the kind of stringent scrutiny the Board and staff are in terms of accountability, transparency, and conflicts of interest. The opportunities for situations commonly described as "circling the wagons", "you pat my back, I'll pat your back" and other irregularites are too high to leave untouched. ICANN will be affected by this paradoxal aspect of its institutional design as it will be described by others - some frankly inimical - as an organization which is too closed on itself; and may already be suffering the consequences of this design in the difficulties the SSR2 Review is finding. Additional disclosure, I have personally observed this in the SSR2 process, whereas the reviews including the first SSR which I had the honor to chair, based on ICANN's previous instiutional design were able to introduce strong critics of all involved ICANN parties and produce results whose beneficial consequences have been adopted over rather long periods. I would be most grateful if you included this note formally as submitted to the comment process, in time before the deadline, and if you could acknowledge receipt of this communication. Unfortunately I have not been able to submit it through the link provided on the website due to some configuration mismatches which will take some time and careful decisions on privacy to resolve. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico[maps.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3…> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com[pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__pisanty.blogspot.com&d=…> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty[linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_pis…> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614[linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_e_gis_…> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty[twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_apisanty&d=…> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org[isoc.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.isoc.org&d=DwMFaQ&c…>

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] FW: [Ext] comment on Standards for Reviews
by Lars Hoffmann Feb. 9, 2018

Feb. 9, 2018

Dear Alejandro, Thank you for your submission. Please note, you had mistyped my email in your original email. I am herewith forwarding your mail so that appears in the comment thread for the Public Comment on Operating Standards. Many thanks and best wishes, Lars From: "Larisa B. Gurnick" <larisa.gurnick(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, February 8, 2018 at 7:09 PM To: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann(a)icann.org> Subject: Fwd: [Ext] comment on Standards for Reviews From: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty(a)gmail.com<mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>> Date: Friday, February 2, 2018 at 13:15 To: Lars Hofmann <lars.hofmann(a)icann.org<mailto:lars.hofmann@icann.org>>, John Jeffrey <john.jeffrey(a)icann.org<mailto:john.jeffrey@icann.org>>, Leon Felipe Sanchez Ambia <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>, Cherine Chalaby ‎ <cherine.chalaby(a)board.icann.org<mailto:cherine.chalaby@board.icann.org>>, Goran Marby <goran.marby(a)icann.org<mailto:goran.marby@icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] comment on Standards for Reviews Dear Mr. Hofmann, please accept this comment as Public Comment on the Operating Standards for ICANN's Specific Reviews The process by which members of Review Teams and similar working groups and parties should be modified to allow the inclusion of volunteers recommended by the Board of Directors and other possible relevant instances outside the present process closed by the SO and AC leadership, in order to enable the introduction of opinions which may dissent from those in the SO and AC leadership. The process approved after the IANA transition has become too closed, as part of a trend to deprive the Board of some opportunities to take part in the activities of ICANN. As a result, the selection of reviewers has now become more political instead of less, and more liable instead of less to lead to a choice of "comfortable" reviewers at the expense of those who may find flaws and recommend changes in parts of ICANN other than the operational and managerial staff. To further aggravate the consequences of this change, the SO and AC leadership is not subject to the kind of stringent scrutiny the Board and staff are in terms of accountability, transparency, and conflicts of interest. The opportunities for situations commonly described as "circling the wagons", "you pat my back, I'll pat your back" and other irregularites are too high to leave untouched. ICANN will be affected by this paradoxal aspect of its institutional design as it will be described by others - some frankly inimical - as an organization which is too closed on itself; and may already be suffering the consequences of this design in the difficulties the SSR2 Review is finding. Additional disclosure, I have personally observed this in the SSR2 process, whereas the reviews including the first SSR which I had the honor to chair, based on ICANN's previous instiutional design were able to introduce strong critics of all involved ICANN parties and produce results whose beneficial consequences have been adopted over rather long periods. I would be most grateful if you included this note formally as submitted to the comment process, in time before the deadline, and if you could acknowledge receipt of this communication. Unfortunately I have not been able to submit it through the link provided on the website due to some configuration mismatches which will take some time and careful decisions on privacy to resolve. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com[pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__pisanty.blogspot.com&d=…> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty[linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_pis…> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614[linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_e_gis_…> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty[twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_apisanty&d=…> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org[isoc.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.isoc.org&d=DwMFaQ&c…> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] GAC comments: Draft Operating Standards for Specific Reviews
by Tom Dale Feb. 5, 2018

Feb. 5, 2018

Please find attached GAC comments on the published Draft Operating Standards for Specific Reviews. Tom Dale ACIG GAC Secretariat ACIG – Australian Continuous Improvement Group evaluate :: improve : innovate Cell: +61 418 207 376 tom(a)acig.com.au<mailto:tom@acig.com.au> www.acig.com.au<http://www.acig.com.au> ACIG is an independent consulting firm engaged to provide secretariat services to ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] Comment on behalf of Alan Greenberg
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

The attached comment is submitted on my own behalf. Please feel free to contact me if anything requires further clarification. Alan Greenberg

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] GNSO Council Comments to the Operating Standards for ICANN's Specific Reviews
by Steve Chan Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Dear All, On behalf of the GNSO Council, please find its comments on the Operating Standards for ICANN's Specific Reviews. Best regards, GNSO Policy Support Staff

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] Operating Standards for ICANN's Specific Reviews
by Austin, Donna Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Please find attached Neustar Inc. comments. Donna Austin Neustar, Inc. / Senior Policy Manager, Registry Solutions Mobile: +1 310 890 9655 donna.austin(a)team.neustar<mailto:donna.austin@team.neustar> / Website: home.neustar<http://www.home.neustar/> Follow Neustar: LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349> / Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar> Reduce your environmental footprint. Print only if necessary. ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] Business Constituency (BC) comment on ICANN proposed Operating Standards for Specific Reviews
by Steve DelBianco Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

The ICANN Business Constituency (BC) submits the attached comment on ICANN’s proposed Operating Standards for Specific Reviews ( ICANN comment page at https://www.icann.org/public-comments/reviews-standards-2017-10-17-en ) This comment was drafted by Faisal Shah, Steve DelBianco, Susan Kawaguchi, Marilyn Cade, and Lawrence OlaWale-Roberts. It was approved in accord with the BC Charter. — Steve DelBianco Vice chair for policy coordination ICANN Business Constituency

1 0

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] ccNSO Council comments on the draft Operating Standards
by Katrina Sataki Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Dear MSSI team, Thank you for your work on the draft! Please find attached the ccNSO Council statement and comment. Kind regards, Katrina Sataki

2 1

[Comments-reviews-standards-17oct17] ccNSO Council comments on the draft Operating Standards
by Katrina Sataki Feb. 2, 2018

Feb. 2, 2018

Dear MSSI team, Thank you for your work on the draft! Please find attached the ccNSO Council statement and comment. Kind regards, Katrina Sataki

1 0