Thanks Jennifer, Phil and Donna for weighing in. Perhaps the concern is that we’ve called this document a “draft” but it too closely resembles a finished policy. I believe (and I think Jennifer’s note confirms) that this was intended to start a dialogue in whatever subsequent group addresses this work, and a mechanism for relaying GNSO ideas, questions and concerns in to that effort. I appreciate the discussion, and hope that we can all get to a place where we’re either comfortable with the draft, or we amend it, or substitute it with something else. Thanks— From: Jennifer Standiford <JStandiford@web.com<mailto:JStandiford@web.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 12:46 To: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz<mailto:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>>, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>>, James Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy Hi Phil and Colleagues, Just a friendly reminder the attached document that was put forth in the GNSO Letter to Akram was referred to as a draft. James also included several questions that remain unanswered that will need to be address in addition to the points that you and Donna have raised. As for Donna’s specific question, I would anticipate that ICANN Conference Participants would be a defined term that would include all ICANN staff and board members. Jennifer From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:36 PM To: Phil Corwin; James M. Bladel; GNSO Council List Subject: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy Hi Phil It’s a good point and also raises another one for me. Are Dr Crocker and the other Board members covered under the ICANN staff policy on Sexual Harassment or would they be covered under a community ICANN attendee policy? Donna From:owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, 6 April 2016 9:33 AM To: James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>; GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy Thinking about this a bit more – how would this incident be treated under any proposed Harassment Policy? http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches-with-risky-caitlyn-jenner-joke<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__domainincite.com_18772-2Dicann-2D53-2Dlaunches-2Dwith-2Drisky-2Dcaitlyn-2Djenner-2Djoke&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=h3XcnXqB85gfZ3Y7DZ8az_JrLeKiCfPqWb4lAHQf4_w&e=> Some found it offensive, and an apology was issued by Chairman Crocker. Is that sufficient or would reporting and investigation be required? Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 12:07 PM To: 'James M. Bladel'; GNSO Council List Subject: RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy Colleagues: I support in principle sending a letter to Akram on this subject and establishing clearer, enforceable policies regarding sexual and other forms of harassment that may take place at ICANN meetings. However, while I am strongly opposed to any form of such harassment, I have some concerns about the proposed draft Harassment Policy, relating to: · This very extensive list of potential offenses being non-exclusive (indicated by the words “At a minimum” that start the document) · The use of the modifier “Offensive” at the start of sections 1-4, in that this subjective standard inevitably raises the question “offensive to whom”? In this regard, I think there must be some element of intent to harass or demean in the behavior subject to sanction, and that any policy should recognize that the cultural diversity of ICANN meeting attendees may lead to situations where remarks that are not intended to offend may nonetheless do so. · A need to strictly define, and limit, the “prompt, appropriate remedial action” that ICANN staff may take if they determine that harassment has occurred (as well as whether ICANN staff are the appropriate parties to undertake such investigations, and whether the investigatory and judgmental/sanctioning roles should be separate). · Contradictory language regarding whether an individual who believes that he/she has witnessed harassment should report it, or must report it. I look forward to engaging in a discussion of these matters on our call of April 14th. Best regards, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From:owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 7:46 PM To: GNSO Council List Subject: [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy Council Colleagues — Attached and copied below, please find a draft letter from the Council to Akram Atallah, in response to his recent blog post (“Conduct at ICANN Meetings” https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blog_conduct-2Dat-2DICANN-2Dmeetings&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=2bT0nSpiH1q_-tgjleaUvWdNq2u6d8arN9tI0S9B0VU&e=>). In this note, I set out to make some high-level points that support further work in this area, without weighing in on any specific indecent. Also, the letter references a statement from the NCUC ExCom (“Statement from NCUC Executive Committee” http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.ncuc.org_pipermail_ncuc-2Ddiscuss_2016-2DMarch_018488.html&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=8hUYalyHSVt4n-N7pswf04QMWd3qMc5hEdlArbgm240&e=>) and the ICANN Harassment Policy drafted by our volunteers (attached), and urges any future effort to consider these materials. If possible, please review these documents prior to our next call on 14 APR. We can collect edits and then decide if/how we want to proceed. Thank you, J. ________________________________ Akram Atallah COO and interim CEO, ICANN Dear Akram – On behalf of the GNSO Council, we would like to thank your for your recent blog post (“Conduct at ICANN Meetings”). Members of the Council, and all of the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, share the goal of ensuring that all members of the community can participate in and contribute to ICANN, in an environment where harassment and discrimination are not tolerated. Without passing judgment on any specific incident, we are encouraged by the commitment from Staff and the Board to engage the community on this subject. In support of this, volunteers on the Council have prepared a draft (“ICANN Conference Harassment Policy”, attached). Several questions remain open, however, including: ? Whether this Policy would enhance, or be distinct from, the existing Expected Standards of Behavior policy ? Whether complaints would be reported to ICANN Staff, or the Office of the Ombudsman, or some other entity or group ? How the policy will be enforced, and ? Other topics and questions that will arise from this work. We expect that members of the GNSO community will be engaged in this effort, and note that some have already undertaken work in their own groups (“Statement from NUCU Executive Committee”). We urge this group to consider these materials in any community undertaking to develop new policy addressing this issue. Thank you Donna Austin, GNSO Vice-Chair James Bladel, GNSO Chair Heather Forrest, GNSO Vice-Chair https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blog_conduct-2Dat-2Dicann-2Dmeetings&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=kieUDRl76GvEhQPJxetsJ4aez7X5o2Vea2-dIT5x-Uc&e=> http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.ncuc.org_pipermail_ncuc-2Ddiscuss_2016-2DMarch_018488.html&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=8hUYalyHSVt4n-N7pswf04QMWd3qMc5hEdlArbgm240&e=> ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.avg.com&d=CwMFAg&c=M...> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11942 - Release Date: 04/02/16