Hello Jeff,
The call for volunteer message sent to the leaders of ICANN structures is intended to highlight the membership category of the IDNs EPDP, as there is a specific deadline and requirements with regard to the membership appointment. However,
the message does contain details about the “participant” category and method for anyone who wishes to sign up as a participant (i.e., contact GNSO Secretariat Team).
In addition, an announcement has already been published on ICANN.org to encourage broader community participation in the IDNs EPDP as “participants” and “observers”. It has also been promoted on ICANN’s social media accounts. You may see
the announcement here:
https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/participate-or-observe-expedited-policy-development-process-on-idns-3-6-2021-en
Furthermore, the community wide Leadership Digest is also promoting the participation methods in the IDNs EPDP as participants and observers. Please see attached the edition just distributed yesterday. Reminder on this will be included
in future editions of the Leadership Digest.
Lastly, the community outreach session during ICANN71 on IDNs EPDP (Monday, 14 June at 14:30-15:30 UTC) will explain the team composition and the various participation methods.
We hope these communications channels are sufficient to promote the wider community participation in the IDNs EPDP.
Best Regards,
Ariel
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via council <council@gnso.icann.org>
Reply-To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>
Date: Friday, June 4, 2021 at 12:59 PM
To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] Potential Communication Error for ePDP IDN Working Group
All,
I was crafting a note to send to the GAC about participation in the IDN ePDP when I noticed that the calls for participation (and the Charter itself) is very confusing. The Working Group is supposed to be a Hybrid Model Working Group (NOT
representative) open to anyone. The only limitation was that there was expected to a certain number of “Members” that could be called on for Consensus Calls. But there could be a potentially unlimited number of “Participants”.
The message sent out to the Cs/SGs/SOs/ACs while technically correct in asking for up to 3 Members, does not state anywhere that the leaders should let their groups know that anyone can participate as a Participant (which would not be considered
in the up to 3 category). It would be great if we could let send a modified message out to the leaders reminding them that the Working Group is open to anyone that wants to participate.
Sincerely,
Jeff
|
|
Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 http://jjnsolutions.com |
