Thanks Anne. Do you have any concerns with telling the Board that both a Supplemental Recommendation and Implementation Guidance is something the small team is considering and ultimately will bring to the broader council for their approval? Thanks, Greg From: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 4:16 AM To: Paul McGrady <paul@elstermcgrady.com> Cc: DiBiase, Gregory <dibiase@amazon.com>; Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin@gmail.com>; COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG; gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] [council] Point of Order - Sub Pro Pending Recommendations Small Team Work CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. P.S. - To put it very succinctly, a statement made to the Board that Council will be providing Implementation Guidance on Applicant Support is premature. Only Council can determine whether or not that will be the case. Accordingly, the statement made to the GAC was also premature. This bears very directly on Council small team transparency issues that have come to the forefront in recent community discussions. Again, the distinction between Policy Recommendations and Implementation Guidance is an important one and the two should not be subject to "blurred lines." Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 3:31 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> wrote: Thanks Greg. As stated by Paul to the GAC, the Council will be providing ideas for the Board that will constitute Implementation Guidance. I don't think the Council has decided that the Supplemental Recommendation developed by the Annex A Section 9 process will include Implementation Guidance. The concern here is that the Recommendation itself will be watered down from the Recommendation approved from the Final Report and that Implementation Guidance is in fact not binding on the Board. Thus, the small team , in its meeting with the Board, should not be telescoping a result that translates to Implementation Guidance when the members of the Small Team Plus may have different input from that and when the Council itself may want to opt to provide a Supplemental Recommendation which constitutes policy (as opposed to Implementation Guidance.) in contrast to the statement that was made before the GAC, it would be more accurate to say that there are several ideas that have been put forward, that these will be considered in the Small Team Plus deliberations, and that some of these may constitute Supplemental Policy Recommendations and some may constitute Implementation Guidance. It should not be stated, ahead of Small Team Plus deliberations and a Council vote on the recommendations sent to Council from the Small Team Plus, that the ideas put forward will be developed will constitute mere "Implementation Guidance". That is jumping the gun and taking over the role that belongs exclusively to Council. It should be much more clear that very specific ideas to be examined in the process may end up being Policy Recommendations, not just Implementation Guidance. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 2:28 AM Paul McGrady <paul@elstermcgrady.com<mailto:paul@elstermcgrady.com>> wrote: Thanks Greg. That’s right. It is likely that the Small Team Plus will have both a Supplemental Recommendation for Council to consider and also Implementation Guidance. Best, Paul From: DiBiase, Gregory <dibiase@amazon.com<mailto:dibiase@amazon.com>> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 4:19 AM To: Paul McGrady <paul@elstermcgrady.com<mailto:paul@elstermcgrady.com>>; Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin@gmail.com<mailto:mesumbeslin@gmail.com>>; Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>>; COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG<mailto:COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>; Terri Agnew via cou. <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] [council] Point of Order - Sub Pro Pending Recommendations Small Team Work Hi All, I understand the concern about stating definitively that Applicant Support would constitute mere "Implementation Guidance" rather than actual policy. But I’m not sure that’s the case. My understanding was that outputs from the Small Team Plus that are sent to Council for consideration would likely consist of both a Supplemental Recommendation and Implementation Guidance. Is that accurate Paul? Anne and Tomslin- do you have any concerns with telling the Board that both a Supplemental Recommendation and Implementation Guidance is something the small team is considering and ultimately will bring to the broader council for their approval? Thanks, Greg From: GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Paul McGrady Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 1:42 AM To: Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin@gmail.com<mailto:mesumbeslin@gmail.com>>; Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>; Terri Agnew via cou. <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] [council] Point of Order - Sub Pro Pending Recommendations Small Team Work CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Anne and Tomslin, Thank you both for this. If the goal is to only make a Supplemental Recommendation, that relegates us to only a Policy position and no position on implementation. This is inconsistent with how the GNSO has been acting for many years. Saying that we will have (1) a policy Supplemental Recommendation AND (2) implementation guidance is nothing radical at all. Based on Anne’s email, I think we should take a few minutes to level set in our next call so that everyone can be reminded about the difference between policy recommendations and implementation guidance. But I don’t think we need to take some decision before speaking with the Board on whether or not Council has the ability to issue both policy Supplemental Recommendations and Implementation Guidance. The Council clearly does. Best, Paul From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Tomslin Samme-Nlar via council Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 8:00 PM To: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>; Terri Agnew via cou. <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Point of Order - Sub Pro Pending Recommendations Small Team Work Hi all, Thank you, Anne for pointing this out. I too do not recall any agreement as to the approach to tackle the Applicant Support ideas, other than that the 'idea' was floated on Sunday as an option. I think there is also agreement that all proposals/recommendations from the Small Team must be approved by the council before they become official council positions. In fact, during our meeting on Sunday, it was stressed that this be strictly adhered to, especially now that non-council members are being invites to form 'Small Team Plus". I therefore support Anne's request that we avoid socialising this idea of using implementation guidance and truncating Recommendation 17.2 as the way forward to address Board's concerns on Applicant support until the council approves it. Warmly, Tomslin On Mon, 23 Oct 2023, 22:43 Anne ICANN, <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Sub Pro Small Team, Today I heard our Sub Pro Small Team fearless leader Paul announce to the GAC that the ideas around Applicant Support that will be developed by the "Small Team Plus" will constitute "Implementation Guidance" for the Board. Of course in Sub Pro "speak", Implementation Guidance is a term of art that means the ideas will not constitute a policy recommendation as contemplated by Annex A, Section 9 which speaks of Supplemental Recommendations which are policy recommendations. I commented on this in our Small Team meeting on Saturday. (For clarity, "implementation Guidance" is a defined term in the Sub Pro Final Report and it is not obligatory if the Board finds that it is impractical.) Although Paul began to speak about Implementation Guidance in the small team meeting on Saturday, I don't recall a consensus being developed on this approach. Perhaps more importantly, it strikes me that the decision as to whether the ideas to be put forward in the Supplemental Recommendation for Applicant Support will constitute Implementation Guidance (and not policy per se) is actually a question for Council and not for the Small Team alone to decide as this is in fact a policy matter. Perhaps Paul (and staff?) are thinking this is the only workable approach because of the many ideas that have been put forward. The thought may be that no one idea (or merging of ideas into one consensus Supplemental Recommendation) will be feasible. Or that this process would take too long, if achievable at all? These are all very real concerns. However, I do need to raise this Point of Order before the meeting with the Board where the Board Statement on Sub Pro Non-Adoption will be reviewed. I believe that in respecting the boundaries of Small Team work, we would need authorization from Council to state to the Board that suggestions for providing expanded assistance in the realm of Applicant Support would constitute mere "Implementation Guidance" rather than actual policy Recommendations which are Supplemental in nature pursuant to Annex A, Section 9. Of course it would be easier for the Board to accept a truncated Recommendation 17.2 which is not specific other than to say "expand Applicant Support". Then we could tack on various Implementation Guidance ideas which do not actually bind the Board. However, again I believe that if that is to be the approach taken by the Small Team, it should be approved in advance by Council.) As incoming Chair, Greg has already indicated in his presentation to Council his concern in relation to transparency of Council small team work. So let's be very careful about this one as we are due to go before the Board to discuss the non-adopted items in the pending Sub Pro Final Report Recommendations. Could we please discuss this further in our Closed Session? I do not think the same statement made today to the GAC should be repeated before the Board without authorization from Council. Thank you, Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-subpropendingrecs-st _______________________________________________ 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. This email originated from outside the firm. Please use caution. This email originated from outside the firm. Please use caution.