July 2011 - council - lists.icann.org

RE: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
by Tim Ruiz July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

It would depend on the location. In some cases it may be principles related to personal freedoms. In others, it may be principles related to ecology and/or use of resources. And in others it may be a National principle, such as in the USA regarding certain countires considered to be terrorist friendly. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > From: William Drake <william.drake(a)uzh.ch> > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 6:54 am > To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim(a)godaddy.com> > Cc: council(a)gnso.icann.org, adrian(a)ausregistry.com.au > > Hi Tim > > Not sure if you were suggesting that I was criticizing someone, but just in case: I wasn't. > > I am trying to understand the issues, and yes,expressing disappointment with the consequences, which is different and not personal. > > What for example would be the issue of principle rationale? > > Thanks > > BD > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote: > > > I am sure that there are many reasons why some of us may ultimately not > > go, some may be prevented by the issues Adrian pointed out, and others > > may choose not to for personal reasons - issues of principle, health > > issues, etc. > > > > But one thing is for sure, none of us are responsible for the conditions > > that exist in different parts of the world. And none of us are being > > compensated for our participation outside of travel reimbursement for > > those who decide to accept it (BTW, I no longer do). So NOT ONE of us > > can or should be criticized directly or indirectly for not attending > > this meeting, or any other, in person. > > > > On a different note, these types of ICANN meetings are not necessary to > > "engage" all parts of the world. I have no doubt there are much > > effective ways to engage various parts of world than these meetings. > > > > Tim > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > > > From: William Drake <william.drake(a)uzh.ch> > > > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 6:29 am > > > To: Adrian Kinderis <adrian(a)ausregistry.com.au> > > > Cc: Tim Ruiz <tim(a)godaddy.com>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" > > > <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > > > > > So are the insurance policies such that basically all of Africa off limits other than MENA and SA? > > > > > > We're setting global policies that Africans have to live with, seems unfortunate if engaging them is off limits.. > > > > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > > From what I understand it is ï¿½not ableï¿½. Insurance and travel restrictions to the region donï¿½t allow it. > > > > > > Of course, there are many that would ï¿½not prefer toï¿½ given the above. > > > > > > Adrian Kinderis > > > Chief Executive Officer > > > AusRegistry International Pty Ltd > > > Level 8, 10 Queens Road > > > Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004 > > > Ph: +61 3 9866 3710 > > > Fax: +61 3 9866 1970 > > > Email: adrian(a)ausregistry.com > > > Web: www.ausregistry.com > > > > > > - Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint > > > > > > The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch] > > > Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2011 9:21 PM > > > To: Adrian Kinderis > > > Cc: Tim Ruiz; council(a)gnso.icann.org > > > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Adrian > > > > > > > > > Do you mean "to not be able" or "to not prefer"? > > > > > > > > > > > > Just wondering how high the special barrier some folks face isï¿½ > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This makes me mad. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not mad at Tim, far from it. > > > > > > > > > > > > But why ICANN continually chooses places that forces key stakeholders and contributors to not be able to participate to the fullest. > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hereï¿½s an idea. Letï¿½s build a remote site and EVERYONE go there... > > > > > > > > > > > > LA Marriott anyone? > > > > > > > > > > > > Adrian Kinderis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz > > > Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2011 3:24 AM > > > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org > > > Subject: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Glen, > > > > > > Can you provide an update of on the expected availability of remote > > > participation for Senegal? > > > > > > Also to all, if there is any movement toward a US or EU remote > > > participation base, I would be up for that and doing what I could to > > > help cover costs. I think John was asking about this earlier. Any > > > interests? > > > > > > Either way, after further consideration I think I may be attending only > > > remotely. > > > > > > > > > Tim > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

2 1

RE: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
by Tim Ruiz July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

I am sure that there are many reasons why some of us may ultimately not go, some may be prevented by the issues Adrian pointed out, and others may choose not to for personal reasons - issues of principle, health issues, etc. But one thing is for sure, none of us are responsible for the conditions that exist in different parts of the world. And none of us are being compensated for our participation outside of travel reimbursement for those who decide to accept it (BTW, I no longer do). So NOT ONE of us can or should be criticized directly or indirectly for not attending this meeting, or any other, in person. On a different note, these types of ICANN meetings are not necessary to "engage" all parts of the world. I have no doubt there are much effective ways to engage various parts of world than these meetings. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > From: William Drake <william.drake(a)uzh.ch> > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 6:29 am > To: Adrian Kinderis <adrian(a)ausregistry.com.au> > Cc: Tim Ruiz <tim(a)godaddy.com>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" > <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > So are the insurance policies such that basically all of Africa off limits other than MENA and SA? > > We're setting global policies that Africans have to live with, seems unfortunate if engaging them is off limits.. > > > B > > > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > From what I understand it is �not able�. Insurance and travel restrictions to the region don�t allow it. > > Of course, there are many that would �not prefer to� given the above. > > Adrian Kinderis > Chief Executive Officer > AusRegistry International Pty Ltd > Level 8, 10 Queens Road > Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004 > Ph: +61 3 9866 3710 > Fax: +61 3 9866 1970 > Email: adrian(a)ausregistry.com > Web: www.ausregistry.com > > - Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint > > The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately. > > > > From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch] > Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2011 9:21 PM > To: Adrian Kinderis > Cc: Tim Ruiz; council(a)gnso.icann.org > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > > > > Hi Adrian > > > Do you mean "to not be able" or "to not prefer"? > > > > Just wondering how high the special barrier some folks face is� > > > > Thanks > > > > Bill > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > > > > This makes me mad. > > > > I am not mad at Tim, far from it. > > > > But why ICANN continually chooses places that forces key stakeholders and contributors to not be able to participate to the fullest. > > > > Crazy. > > > > Here�s an idea. Let�s build a remote site and EVERYONE go there... > > > > LA Marriott anyone? > > > > Adrian Kinderis > > > > > > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz > Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2011 3:24 AM > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org > Subject: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal > > > > > Glen, > > Can you provide an update of on the expected availability of remote > participation for Senegal? > > Also to all, if there is any movement toward a US or EU remote > participation base, I would be up for that and doing what I could to > help cover costs. I think John was asking about this earlier. Any > interests? > > Either way, after further consideration I think I may be attending only > remotely. > > > Tim > > > > > > > > > > > > >

3 2

Rosemary Sinclair's update to SOI
by Glen de Saint Géry July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

Rosemary Sinclair's updated statement of interest Date: 22 Jun 2011 On 7 July 2011 I was appointed Chair, Regional Telecommunications Inquiry Review Team by the Australian Government for 2011-2012. This is a part-time role. I was appointed Director, External Relations at the Australian School of Business (ASB) at the University of New South Wales in May 2011. This position includes responsibility for the ASB website and web strategy including use of social media tools among 60,000 Alumni. I am immediate past Chair, INTUG (International Telecommunications Users Group). I have represented INTUG as Head of Delegation to APECTEL and Expert Adviser at OECD CISP meetings. I have been a Demand Class Board Member of auDA since October 2009. In 2008 the Australian Government reviewed the participation of consumer groups in communications policy development and implementation in Australia. I was part of a multi-stakeholder group involved in reviewing existing arrangements and proposing a new structure, responsibilities and funding base for a new organisation, ACCAN - the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network. >From 2003-2010, I organized ATUG's Regional Roadshow has involved visiting over 75 towns throughout Australia, travelling over 100,000 kms and speaking with over 3500 community members about the availability and potential of advanced communications services. A specific focus was the Internet and e-security. People of all backgrounds attended the town events - local government, older citizens, young students, parents, local business operators, farmers. The shared vision was high quality communications and online services in the remotest parts of Australia. In the future more and more effective use of communications by these groups will depend on the Internet - this is the basis of my interest in participating in the work of ICANN. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting
by Tim Ruiz July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

Interesting suggestion Stephane. But I guess I got a different vibe from the tweets you mentioned and from other concerns expressed. For example, was Peter aware of the job offer or had he accepted it prior to the vote? If so, did he disclose that prior to voting and/or did it influence his vote? Also, now that he has taken the job, what protections exist to prevent undue influence and/or access to the Board and Staff? I think those questions are at the root of most concerns I have heard expressed, including my own. My belief is that with the new gTLD expansion, this type of so-called revolving door situation will be more frequent, and if not handled well it will erode confidence in ICANN and serve to confirm that it is just an Old Boys Club as so many have accused. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting > From: StÃ©phane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 5:20 am > To: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au> > Cc: "GNSO Council List" <council(a)gnso.icann.org>, "John Jeffrey" > <john.jeffrey(a)icann.org>, "Steve Crocker" <steve(a)shinkuro.com> > > Thanks Bruce. > > If it can help, this is my personal view on this: http://www.stephanevangelder.com/archives/373-ICANN-needs-an-independent,-p… > > Thanks, > > Stéphane > > > > > > Le 20 juil. 2011 à 14:20, Bruce Tonkin a écrit : > > Hello All, > > Just to elaborate a little further on current rules, the Board also has a code of conduct and a conflicts policy. > > > Code of conduct is available at: > > http://www.icann.org/en/committees/board-governance/bod-code-of-conduct-21a… > > Code of conduct guidelines at: > > http://www.icann.org/en/committees/board-governance/bod-code-of-conduct-gui… (this was something updated recently to deal with confidentiality guidelines). > > The conflicts policy is available at: > > http://www.icann.org/en/committees/coi/coi-policy-30jul09-en.htm > > > As chair of the Board's Governance Committee - we are constantly evolving such documents, and beginning to extend the base documents with operating guidelines. > > As a result of this recent case, I welcome suggestions for how any of these documents can be improved. > > Each Board director is also required to make an annual statement of interest, which includes the following question: > > " An existing or potential ownership, professional or investment interest in, or employment or any other Compensation arrangement with, any entity whose business or operation has been or will be directly affected by a decision or action of ICANN, including by reason of a potential or planned application or possible agreement for operation of a new generic top-level domain (gTLD) or delegation of a country code internationalized domain name (ccIDN);" > > We do have processes for dealing with a potential conflict - including an undisclosed conflict by a currently sitting Board member. We don't have an explicit process for dealing with any cases that come to light after a director leaves the Board. > > A short overview of statements of interest is maintained at: > > http://www.icann.org/en/board/summary-board-soi-en.htm > > and the 24 June version is available at: > > http://www.icann.org/en/board/summary-soi-24jun11-en.htm > > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > > >

1 0

Council meeting; motions
by KnobenW＠telekom.de July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

In case I cannot attend some of the agenda topics (since I have to b reak for a certain time) I'd like to forward the following questions/comments in writing: * Motion on IRTP(B): agreed * Motion on JIG: agreed * Motion on PEDNR: Do the Resolveds cover all WG recommendations in the report, and if not, why? How shall the board deal with these rec's? E.g. the "Note" under (A) may cause uncertainty as to what extent special board consideration may be necessary. But anyway: agreed * Motion on PDP: agreed Kind regards Wolf-Ulrich

2 1

RE: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting
by john＠crediblecontext.com July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

3 2

Public comment: Proposed Revisions to Chapters 3 and 4 of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures Relating to Proxy Voting
by Glen de Saint Géry July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-19jul11-en.htm Proposed Revisions to Chapters 3 and 4 of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures Relating to Proxy Voting Comment Period Deadlines (*) Important Information Links Public Comment Box<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/gnso-proxy-voting-19jul11-en.htm> Open Date: 19 July 2011 To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:gnso-proxy-voting@icann.org> Close Date: 9 August 2011 Time (UTC): 23:59 View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-proxy-voting/> Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose The GNSO Council recently identified areas for improvement in the GNSO Council Operating Procedures http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf [PDF, 427 KB] that would simplify and clarify the procedures relating to proxy voting. At its meeting in Singapore on 22 June 2011 the GNSO Council approved a resolution https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+22+June+2011 directing Staff to produce a redlined revision of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures incorporating proposed revisions and to post this document for twenty-one (21) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum. ICANN Staff is seeking comments on Proposed Revisions to Chapters 3 and 4 of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures Relating to Proxy Voting<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-revisions-19jul11-en.pdf> [PDF,158 KB]. Section II: Background The GNSO Council recently identified areas for improvement in the GNSO Council Operating Procedures http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf [PDF, 427 KB] that would simplify and clarify the procedures relating to proxy voting and tasked the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) with completing a revision to improve the procedures. On 14 June 2011 the OSC submitted to the GNSO Council recommended revisions. At its meeting in Singapore on 22 June 2011 the GNSO Council acknowledged receipt of the recommended revisions submitted by the OSC and approved a resolution https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+22+June+2011 directing Staff to produce a redlined revision of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures incorporating the recommended revisions and to post this document for twenty-one (21) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum. The proposed revisions affect the following sections of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures: Chapter 3 GNSO Council Meetings, Section 3.8 Absences and Vacancies; Chapter 4 Voting, Section 4.5.3 Remedies to Avoid Abstaining on a Vote; 4.5.3b Proxy Voting; and 4.5.3c Temporary Alternate. The OSC found that the original procedures could be simplified and also that they contradicted the internal procedures of certain constituencies. The OSC simplified the procedures in terms of how the proxy giver assigns a vote to the proxy holder. In particular, the proxy giver can give the proxy to any other Councilor. The revision does, however, maintain the requirement that a Council member is not permitted to be a proxy holder for more than one proxy giver. The OSC also simplified the procedures in terms of the proxy vote to three rules: 1) it may either be directed, if applicable, by the proxy giver's appointing organization; 2) the proxy giver may instruct the proxy holder how to cast the vote; 3) in the absence of any instruction the proxy holder may vote freely on conscience. Section III: Document and Resource Links * GNSO Council Operating Procedures http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf [PDF, 427 KB] * GNSO Council Resolution https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+22+June+2011 * Proposed Revisions to Chapters 3 and 4 of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures Relating to Proxy Voting <http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-revisions-19jul11-en.pdf> [PDF, 158 KB] Section IV: Additional Information None Staff Contact: Julie Hedlund Email: julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Proposed%20Revisions%20to%20Chapters%203%20and%204%20of%20the%20GNSO%20Council%20Operating%20Procedures%20Relating%20to%20Proxy%20Voting%20public%20comment%20period> Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: proxy vote
by Glen de Saint Géry July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011

FYI Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org From: Andrei Kolesnikov [mailto:andrei@cctld.ru] Sent: jeudi 21 juillet 2011 08:49 To: gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org; 'carlos dionisio aguirre' Subject: proxy vote I will be unable to attend the GNSO Council meeting scheduled for July 21st. The reasons for my absence is a 100% time overlap with .RU Council meeting which I have to deliver a 1/2 year report. According to the GNSO Operating Procedures on absentee balloting (Section 4.4), I will be permitted to exercise a vote for all proposed motions as YES. According to the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 4.5), pursuant to this notification (*), a proxy is automatically transferred to the Council NCA Carlos Dionisio Aguirre who has been notified of this action and is prepared to register a vote in my absence for each of the motions. For any Council motions not explicitly listed above, I understand that my vote will be recorded as "Absent." Best regards, --andrei

1 0

RE: [council] Senegal - Letter with State Dept stamp for personal computers etc.?
by Tim Ruiz July 20, 2011

July 20, 2011

I only read that Senegal customs had to approve computers or they would be held, but nothing about how to get approval, and you can only take one and it cannot be new. Not sure if smart phones qualify or are considered separate. Trying to get further details. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [council] Senegal - Letter with State Dept stamp for personal > computers etc.? > From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette(a)cov.com> > Date: Wed, July 20, 2011 11:26 am > To: "'council(a)gnso.icann.org'" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > Greetings! > > Have any of the other US folks been told that, in order to avoid paying duty on personal computer, iPad, etc., one has to have a letter that itemizes the equipment, states it's for personal use, and bears a State Department stamp? When I asked if the > State Department stamp meant apostille, the person at the Senegalese Embassy didn't know. Before I go (or, more accurately, my assistant goes) chasing this down to find out exactly what is needed, I thought I'd check to see if someone else has. > > Anyone? > > K > > > > >

2 1

Question on the revolving door issue in Singapore - missing piece of transcript
by Glen de Saint Géry July 20, 2011

July 20, 2011

Dear Councillors, Further to Kristina Rosette's enquiry: >The transcript of the Council-Board meeting appears to omit my question to >Steve Crocker on the revolving door issue and his answer. I've let Glen know. >If there was a particular portion of that meeting that was of interest to you, >you may want to check the transcript. You can access it from >http://singapore41.icann.org/node/24435. This has not been overlooked. There was a drop in the recording line so Kristina's question to Steve Crocker on the revolving door issue and his answer is missing in the transcript, but we will have it transcribed from the back-up recording. Sorry this is taking some time, but it will be sent to the Council list and published along with the other transcripts when it is ready. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

2 1