I think we have had a number of good suggestions including from Avri and James which all fit under one overarching theme: "What is the essence of ICANN?", i.e. is ICANN the corporation, is ICANN the community, or is it both? Avris trust comments stem from a problem that arises when staff makes an upopular decision, rubber stamped by the board in a process that has no accountability built in that is worth writing home about. We have seen public comment presentations where comments were re-interpreted or manipulated to suit a certain desired outcome. Such actions breed dissent and potentially disfunctionality. We have discussed the problem of recruiting volunteers for policy work, but is it a wonder that volunteer numbers are dwindling when the perception exists (real or imagined) that big decisions are made that exclude or disregard community input? What causes for mistrust can be eliminated, and how? How do we see ICANN accountability as functional and effective? How should government influence work, where are its limits? So I would propose that instead of focussing on one narrow topic we should initiate a series of bottom-up debates on how the community would like to see ICANN develop in the next years, an Agenda 2020 if you will. Best, Volker Am 27.08.2014 15:21, schrieb James M. Bladel:

Hi Jonathan, thanks for kicking this off. Another potential topic, perhaps belonging under the umbrella of "Accountability":

I would like to see a frank & candid, community-wide discussion on the future role of the GAC. Between TLD safeguards, proposed changes to the Bylaws, the sticky IGO/NGO issue, and the very real possibility that the GAC could unilaterally adopt a voting model, all converge on an ICANN model that is dominated by a multi-governmental structure, which fails a key element of the March 2014 NTIA announcement.

Everyone recognizes the need for governments to have a seat at the table, and for their advice to be given careful consideration on matters concerning public policy. But there's a sliver of "public policy" in everything at ICANN, and the nature of government participation makes them reluctant to accept anything short of immediate and total adoption of their advice.

Where do we go from here? Can the relevance of the SO/ACs be preserved, or is every topic or material issue destined to become a GAC/Board negotiation? What limitations or backstops can check government influence, while still allowing for full consideration of their advice?

Thank you,

J. ____________ James Bladel GoDaddy

On Aug 26, 2014, at 14:40, "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@afilias.info <mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> wrote:

...

All,

Please be aware that ICANN is seeking (urgent) input on selection of content for a “high interest” topic session in LA.

Thanks,

Jonathan

*From:*David Olive [mailto:david.olive@icann.org] *Sent:* 26 August 2014 03:04 *To:* Byron Holland; heather.dryden@ic.gc.ca <mailto:heather.dryden@ic.gc.ca>; Jonathan Robinson; Louie Lee; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Jun Murai; Lars-Johan Liman; Elisa Cooper; tony holmes; krosette@cov.com <mailto:krosette@cov.com>; rafik dammak; William Drake; Michele Neylon :: Blacknight; Drazek, Keith; Rudi Vansnick; Fadi Chehade; Cassia Oliveira; Tina Shelebian; Lynn Lipinski; Lynn Gravel; Gisella Gruber; Global Leadership; William Drake; Robert Hoggarth; Duncan Burns *Subject:* Re: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles - A Reminder

Dear Community Leaders:

It’s been an unusually busy August so far and, understandably, I have not received much feedback from you all on prospective topics for your SO-AC High-Interest topic at the ICANN51 Public Meeting in Los Angeles.

Certain topics, such as ICANN Accountability, the IANA Stewardship Transition, and new gTLD Directory Services (WHOIS), appear to be covered by other session programming on Monday or elsewhere during the week, so, additional topics are now needed for the potential session discussion.

The staff meeting and programming team is giving me some more time to collaborate with you on this session, and we should start identifying some specific topics so that you have time to lead some conversations within your communities over the next month in preparation for the LA session discussion.

I’ve been able to extend the topic-brainstorming deadline to COB this Thursday. Please share any thoughts or ideas with me at your earliest convenience.

Best,

David

David A. Olive

Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727

Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611

Email: david.olive@icann.org <mailto:david.olive@icann.org>

www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org>

*From: *David Olive <david.olive@icann.org <mailto:david.olive@icann.org>> *Date: *Thursday, August 14, 2014 7:49 PM *To: *Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca <mailto:byron.holland@cira.ca>>, Heather Dryden <Heather.Dryden@ic.gc.ca <mailto:Heather.Dryden@ic.gc.ca>>, Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com <mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>>, Louie Lee <louie@louie.net <mailto:louie@louie.net>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se <mailto:paf@netnod.se>>, Jun Murai <junsec@wide.ad.jp <mailto:junsec@wide.ad.jp>>, Lars-Johan Liman <liman@netnod.se <mailto:liman@netnod.se>>, Elisa Cooper <Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com <mailto:Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com>>, tony holmes <tonyarholmes@btinternet.com <mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com>>, "krosette@cov.com <mailto:krosette@cov.com>" <krosette@cov.com <mailto:krosette@cov.com>>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>>, William Drake <william.drake@uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch>>, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@blacknight.com <mailto:michele@blacknight.com>>, "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@isoc.be <mailto:rudi.vansnick@isoc.be>>, Fadi Chehade <fadi.chehade@icann.org <mailto:fadi.chehade@icann.org>>, Cassia Oliveira <cassia.oliveira@icann.org <mailto:cassia.oliveira@icann.org>>, Tina Shelebian <tina.shelebian@icann.org <mailto:tina.shelebian@icann.org>>, Lynn Lipinski <lynn.lipinski@icann.org <mailto:lynn.lipinski@icann.org>>, Lynn Gravel <lynn.gravel@cira.ca <mailto:lynn.gravel@cira.ca>>, Gisella Gruber <Gisella.Gruber@icann.org <mailto:Gisella.Gruber@icann.org>>, Global Leadership <global_leadership@icann.org <mailto:global_leadership@icann.org>>, William Drake <wjdrake@gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake@gmail.com>>, Rob Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth@icann.org <mailto:robert.hoggarth@icann.org>>, Duncan Burns <duncan.burns@icann.org <mailto:duncan.burns@icann.org>> *Subject: *SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles

Dear SO/AC/SG Leaders:

Thank you all for confirming your interest in proceeding with the planning for an SO-AC High Interest Session in Los Angeles. Working with our staff Meeting Team colleagues, it appears that Monday in LA will again offer the best window for the session. I have informed the ICANN 51 Steering Committee of the need for the session and we have discussed the following scenario.

Monday programming will offer opportunities for community discussion on a range of topics of high interest to the community. We can count on their being at least one session addressing the IANA Stewardship Transition and another session addressing the ICANN Accountability matter. Heather has also noted the likelihood of a GAC request for a session on Registration Data (WHOIS) issues.

As a result of this overall concept, we suggest planning to conduct a session that highlights one or two topics of high community interest _that are different_ from these three main topic areas. It would be helpful to have you share topic suggestion on this list over the next week or so. Staff will compile the list of all suggestion received by 25 August and then I’ll circulate the list of possibilities to all of you for winnowing down. My hope is that, via email, we can quickly reach consensus on a couple of topics so that all of you will have the opportunity to glean your community views to share during the session.

Logistically, we will plan to run the session largely like the previous hot-topic session in Buenos Aires – recall the Brad White-led format. I am happy to get feedback from you on any improvements we can introduce to that format previous format.

Looking forward to hearing your suggestion of topics.

Best regards,

David

David A. Olive

Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727

Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611

Email: david.olive@icann.org <mailto:david.olive@icann.org>

www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org>

-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

John, Thanks. Imperfect perhaps but I am sure we can manage the triage. This is not to replace option to funnel through Constituency / SG but to complement. In any event, I do not expect that our/my input with trump the Constituency / SG input. Jonathan From: john@crediblecontext.com [mailto:john@crediblecontext.com] Sent: 27 August 2014 11:08 To: Volker Greimann; James M. Bladel; jrobinson@afilias.info Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: Re: [council] FW: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles - A Reminder All, I have a question. In as much as the original request was made of SO and ACs leaders, are you not funneling your recommendations through your constituency or stakeholder group? I would hate to see the suggestions from those groups overlooked because staff looks at the GNSO Council as some sort of hierarchical filter. Berard --------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [council] FW: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles - A Reminder From: "Volker Greimann" <vgreimann@key-Systems.net> Date: 8/27/14 6:40 am To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, jrobinson@afilias.info Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> I think we have had a number of good suggestions including from Avri and James which all fit under one overarching theme: "What is the essence of ICANN?", i.e. is ICANN the corporation, is ICANN the community, or is it both? Avris trust comments stem from a problem that arises when staff makes an upopular decision, rubber stamped by the board in a process that has no accountability built in that is worth writing home about. We have seen public comment presentations where comments were re-interpreted or manipulated to suit a certain desired outcome. Such actions breed dissent and potentially disfunctionality. We have discussed the problem of recruiting volunteers for policy work, but is it a wonder that volunteer numbers are dwindling when the perception exists (real or imagined) that big decisions are made that exclude or disregard community input? What causes for mistrust can be eliminated, and how? How do we see ICANN accountability as functional and effective? How should government influence work, where are its limits? So I would propose that instead of focussing on one narrow topic we should initiate a series of bottom-up debates on how the community would like to see ICANN develop in the next years, an Agenda 2020 if you will. Best, Volker Am 27.08.2014 15:21, schrieb James M. Bladel: Hi Jonathan, thanks for kicking this off. Another potential topic, perhaps belonging under the umbrella of "Accountability": I would like to see a frank & candid, community-wide discussion on the future role of the GAC. Between TLD safeguards, proposed changes to the Bylaws, the sticky IGO/NGO issue, and the very real possibility that the GAC could unilaterally adopt a voting model, all converge on an ICANN model that is dominated by a multi-governmental structure, which fails a key element of the March 2014 NTIA announcement. Everyone recognizes the need for governments to have a seat at the table, and for their advice to be given careful consideration on matters concerning public policy. But there's a sliver of "public policy" in everything at ICANN, and the nature of government participation makes them reluctant to accept anything short of immediate and total adoption of their advice. Where do we go from here? Can the relevance of the SO/ACs be preserved, or is every topic or material issue destined to become a GAC/Board negotiation? What limitations or backstops can check government influence, while still allowing for full consideration of their advice? Thank you, J. ____________ James Bladel GoDaddy On Aug 26, 2014, at 14:40, "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote: All, Please be aware that ICANN is seeking (urgent) input on selection of content for a “high interest” topic session in LA. Thanks, Jonathan From: David Olive [mailto:david.olive@icann.org] Sent: 26 August 2014 03:04 To: Byron Holland; heather.dryden@ic.gc.ca; Jonathan Robinson; Louie Lee; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Jun Murai; Lars-Johan Liman; Elisa Cooper; tony holmes; krosette@cov.com; rafik dammak; William Drake; Michele Neylon :: Blacknight; Drazek, Keith; Rudi Vansnick; Fadi Chehade; Cassia Oliveira; Tina Shelebian; Lynn Lipinski; Lynn Gravel; Gisella Gruber; Global Leadership; William Drake; Robert Hoggarth; Duncan Burns Subject: Re: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles - A Reminder Dear Community Leaders: It’s been an unusually busy August so far and, understandably, I have not received much feedback from you all on prospective topics for your SO-AC High-Interest topic at the ICANN51 Public Meeting in Los Angeles. Certain topics, such as ICANN Accountability, the IANA Stewardship Transition, and new gTLD Directory Services (WHOIS), appear to be covered by other session programming on Monday or elsewhere during the week, so, additional topics are now needed for the potential session discussion. The staff meeting and programming team is giving me some more time to collaborate with you on this session, and we should start identifying some specific topics so that you have time to lead some conversations within your communities over the next month in preparation for the LA session discussion. I’ve been able to extend the topic-brainstorming deadline to COB this Thursday. Please share any thoughts or ideas with me at your earliest convenience. Best, David David A. Olive Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Email: david.olive@icann.org www.icann.org From: David Olive <david.olive@icann.org> Date: Thursday, August 14, 2014 7:49 PM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland@cira.ca>, Heather Dryden <Heather.Dryden@ic.gc.ca>, Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>, Louie Lee <louie@louie.net>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se>, Jun Murai <junsec@wide.ad.jp>, Lars-Johan Liman <liman@netnod.se>, Elisa Cooper <Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com>, tony holmes <tonyarholmes@btinternet.com>, "krosette@cov.com" <krosette@cov.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com>, William Drake <william.drake@uzh.ch>, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@blacknight.com>, "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@isoc.be>, Fadi Chehade <fadi.chehade@icann.org>, Cassia Oliveira <cassia.oliveira@icann.org>, Tina Shelebian <tina.shelebian@icann.org>, Lynn Lipinski <lynn.lipinski@icann.org>, Lynn Gravel <lynn.gravel@cira.ca>, Gisella Gruber <Gisella.Gruber@icann.org>, Global Leadership <global_leadership@icann.org>, William Drake <wjdrake@gmail.com>, Rob Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth@icann.org>, Duncan Burns <duncan.burns@icann.org> Subject: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles Dear SO/AC/SG Leaders: Thank you all for confirming your interest in proceeding with the planning for an SO-AC High Interest Session in Los Angeles. Working with our staff Meeting Team colleagues, it appears that Monday in LA will again offer the best window for the session. I have informed the ICANN 51 Steering Committee of the need for the session and we have discussed the following scenario. Monday programming will offer opportunities for community discussion on a range of topics of high interest to the community. We can count on their being at least one session addressing the IANA Stewardship Transition and another session addressing the ICANN Accountability matter. Heather has also noted the likelihood of a GAC request for a session on Registration Data (WHOIS) issues. As a result of this overall concept, we suggest planning to conduct a session that highlights one or two topics of high community interest that are different from these three main topic areas. It would be helpful to have you share topic suggestion on this list over the next week or so. Staff will compile the list of all suggestion received by 25 August and then I’ll circulate the list of possibilities to all of you for winnowing down. My hope is that, via email, we can quickly reach consensus on a couple of topics so that all of you will have the opportunity to glean your community views to share during the session. Logistically, we will plan to run the session largely like the previous hot-topic session in Buenos Aires – recall the Brad White-led format. I am happy to get feedback from you on any improvements we can introduce to that format previous format. Looking forward to hearing your suggestion of topics. Best regards, David David A. Olive Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Email: david.olive@icann.org www.icann.org -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

I also support James' suggestion about the role of the GAC. A broad session on accountability could just get diluted into bland generalities, the like of which we can tune into any time at NetMundiale meetings or the WEF. ICANN has a targeted and highly topical issue of acute current concern, i.e. that we may be sleepwalking into a constitutional change that has not been discussed throughout the model. Let's talk about that. Re. the role of Council in 'aggregating stakeholder preferences', this specific issue has been one of great concern within the NCSG over the past weeks and we would welcome a proper public discussion. Maria On 28 August 2014 08:55, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

hi,

I tend to see the council as the aggregation point for the various SGs groups, and the SGs as aggregation point for the various constituencies and interest groups. Seems appropriate to me that the Council should collect, do the synthesis and pass things on.

After all the council is the representative of the GNSO and its chair is the chair of he GNSO. Who better to bring things together than our chair. Sometimes we worry about the loss of reputation of the GNSO and its council. Perhaps the effort to minimize it in the service of the constituencies is part of the issue. And I do not mean to say it is a hierarchy, but rather a progressive aggregation, with each entity responsible to the representative of the groups it contains (except, of course, for the Board which claims not to be composed of representatives).

If we don't use the council as an aggregation point, what we seem to say is that the task of aggregation and recommendation defaults to the staff and Board. Personally, I don't think that is optimal.

avri

On 27-Aug-14 18:08, john@crediblecontext.com wrote:

...

All,

I have a question.

In as much as the original request was made of SO and ACs leaders, are you not funneling your recommendations through your constituency or stakeholder group? I would hate to see the suggestions from those groups overlooked because staff looks at the GNSO Council as some sort of hierarchical filter.

Berard

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJT/uB+AAoJEOo+L8tCe36Hl9YH/jXrFQCbAGUcQwbIwNByRgD2 sYFMXOxNFstVakpov7KQlR9IY4DlM9OMGeL8kSIFO79ifAd9ZU7YgjpEpS/3KmQr MyhqJXiqOtzLugQTcXf+keYnK7nvwmwmxfA4jFZMO4G5t+5YDsslLQ0X83nFFdIf tNwX6u8u7C5J7wIQR9QVZAUDzlV1BlPmHJXvXW+UdFr8S1kuPcdJ0nAt4zM1TT+4 si2e2/TPmpzQb46iRpatyIlLPrdHN1GqV22wzmh/wZlwy4TlujOssNd6Nk/I2YS5 FYAG2rihOhwxwcmCkaItlPxAPsSFYTxfDbGmdCStvCp2Je3z0oA0QHcg52P1amQ= =yWnq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----