Help Share the Consensus Playbook
== Consensus Playbook Published Originated from GNSO's Policy Development Process (PDP) 3.0 initiative and a subsequent Additional Budget Request (ABR), the Consensus Playbook has been completed for the ICANN community to reference and use. The Consensus Playbook can be downloaded here: http://go.icann.org/consensus This playbook was developed by an external vendor (Consensus Building Institute - CBI.org<https://www.cbi.org/>) via an Additional Budget Request<https://go.icann.org/3bkd5Oz> (ABR) for FY20 submitted by the GNSO Council, based on PDP 3.0 improvements<http://go.icann.org/pdp3dot0>. The ICANN Board approved<https://community.icann.org/x/Wxq8BQ> the ABR contingent upon the playbook being developed with broad applicability across the community, and not just limited to GNSO PDPs. Hence, this Consensus Playbook aims to provide community volunteers with practical tools and best practices for building consensus, bridging differences, and breaking deadlocks within ICANN processes beyond just GNSO working groups. In developing the playbook, CBI interviewed fourteen (14) ICANN community leaders across ICANN's SOs and ACs, who shared their extensive consensus building experience in leading and participating in working groups and community groups. The playbook stresses that consensus building should be considered as a journey and it does not just take place at the end of a group's deliberations. To that end, we'd like to draw your attention to Appendix A, which serves as a reference guide to help inform you which of the fifteen (15) "plays" are applicable to the various phases of the community's work. It is important to note that this playbook does not seek to change the definition of consensus or the methods of decision making as prescribed in each community group's rules and procedure; it does not seek to introduce any new requirements either. It is designed for the ICANN community and is only permitted to be used by the ICANN community in support of ICANN related work. The playbook shall not be used for any non-ICANN related purposes. All ICANN community volunteers are strongly encouraged to review the playbook. We anticipate additional opportunities for the ICANN community to discuss the contents and practical utility of the playbook.
ALAC does not have a definition for its consensus? (see Appendix 3) I am surprised that this has been missing: https://atlarge.icann.org/get-involved/vote-and-consensus Kindest regards, Olivier On 24/04/2020 16:56, Evin Erdogdu wrote:
==
*Consensus Playbook Published*
Originated from GNSO’s Policy Development Process (PDP) 3.0 initiative and a subsequent Additional Budget Request (ABR), the /Consensus Playbook/ has been completed for the ICANN community to reference and use. *The /Consensus Playbook/ can be downloaded here: **http://go.icann.org/consensus*
This playbook was developed by an external vendor (Consensus Building Institute - CBI.org <https://www.cbi.org/>) via an Additional Budget Request <https://go.icann.org/3bkd5Oz>(ABR) for FY20 submitted by the GNSO Council, based on PDP 3.0 improvements <http://go.icann.org/pdp3dot0>. The ICANN Board approved <https://community.icann.org/x/Wxq8BQ>the ABR contingent upon the playbook being developed with *broad applicability across the community*, and not just limited to GNSO PDPs. Hence, this /Consensus Playbook/ aims to provide community volunteers with practical tools and best practices for building consensus, bridging differences, and breaking deadlocks within ICANN processes beyond just GNSO working groups. In developing the playbook, CBI interviewed fourteen (14) ICANN community leaders across ICANN’s SOs and ACs, who shared their extensive consensus building experience in leading and participating in working groups and community groups.
The playbook stresses that consensus building should be considered as a journey and it does not just take place at the end of a group’s deliberations. To that end, we’d like to draw your attention to Appendix A, which serves as a reference guide to help inform you which of the fifteen (15) “plays” are applicable to the various phases of the community’s work.
It is important to note that this playbook does not seek to change the definition of consensus or the methods of decision making as prescribed in each community group’s rules and procedure; it does not seek to introduce any new requirements either.*It is designed for the ICANN community and is only permitted to be used by the ICANN community in support of ICANN related work. The playbook shall not be used for any non-ICANN related purposes.*
All ICANN community volunteers are strongly encouraged to review the playbook. We anticipate additional opportunities for the ICANN community to discuss the contents and practical utility of the playbook.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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.
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Actually, it doesn't say we don't have a definition of Consensus. I just acts as if we don't exist. But then, we are in company. Neither does the SSAC. But it does document the "Separation Cross Community WG" (the group that would get created when IANA messes up so badly we need to replace PTI)!!! Quite Bizarre. The link you provide says that it is up to the ALAC Chair and RALO leadership to decide on Consensus, which is accurate. What it does not say is that for the ALAC, the RoP go on to much more formally define how that may be done (with out 80% rule-of-thumb). Alan At 2020-04-25 12:34 PM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
ALAC does not have a definition for its consensus? (see Appendix 3) I am surprised that this has been missing: <https://atlarge.icann.org/get-involved/vote-and-consensus>https://atlarge.icann.org/get-involved/vote-and-consensus
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 24/04/2020 16:56, Evin Erdogdu wrote:
==
Consensus Playbook Published
Originated from GNSOs Policy Development Process (PDP) 3.0 initiative and a subsequent Additional Budget Request (ABR), the Consensus Playbook has been completed for the ICANN community to reference and use. The Consensus Playbook can be downloaded here: <http://go.icann.org/consensus>http://go.icann.org/consensus
This playbook was developed by an external vendor (Consensus Building Institute - <https://www.cbi.org/>CBI.org) via an <https://go.icann.org/3bkd5Oz>Additional Budget Request (ABR) for FY20 submitted by the GNSO Council, based on <http://go.icann.org/pdp3dot0>PDP 3.0 improvements. The ICANN Board <https://community.icann.org/x/Wxq8BQ>approved the ABR contingent upon the playbook being developed with broad applicability across the community, and not just limited to GNSO PDPs. Hence, this Consensus Playbook aims to provide community volunteers with practical tools and best practices for building consensus, bridging differences, and breaking deadlocks within ICANN processes beyond just GNSO working groups. In developing the playbook, CBI interviewed fourteen (14) ICANN community leaders across ICANNs SOs and ACs, who shared their extensive consensus building experience in leading and participating in working groups and community groups.
The playbook stresses that consensus building should be considered as a journey and it does not just take place at the end of a groups deliberations. To that end, wed like to draw your attention to Appendix A, which serves as a reference guide to help inform you which of the fifteen (15) plays are applicable to the various phases of the communitys work.
It is important to note that this playbook does not seek to change the definition of consensus or the methods of decision making as prescribed in each community groups rules and procedure; it does not seek to introduce any new requirements either. It is designed for the ICANN community and is only permitted to be used by the ICANN community in support of ICANN related work. The playbook shall not be used for any non-ICANN related purposes.
All ICANN community volunteers are strongly encouraged to review the playbook. We anticipate additional opportunities for the ICANN community to discuss the contents and practical utility of the playbook.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list <mailto:CPWG@icann.org>CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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>https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (<https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>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.
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD <http://www.gih.com/ocl.html>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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.
participants (3)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Evin Erdogdu -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond