Thanks James. This is a very thoughtful response. I agree that everyone participating has some interest in relation to point of view. It strikes me that it is primarily the Board of Directors, in their fiduciary capacity that must act “in the overall best interest of Internet users and the stability and security of the Internet’s system of unique identifiers”, irrespective of personal interests and the interests of any entity with which they are affiliated. This phrase in the Code of Conduct actually strikes me as a pretty good “short form” definition for the “Global Public Interest”, something we are always trying to grasp. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image001.png@01D3440A.F542BDF0] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: James M. Bladel [mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 8:29 AM To: 'Terri Agnew'; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org; Aikman-Scalese, Anne Cc: gnso-secs@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Reminder regarding Expected Standards of Behavior Hi Anne - Well, candidly, I think everyone has some interest in the outcomes of Policy Development. Whether that’s direct, like those of us representing our Employers of Clients, or indirect, like those seeking to further their own career in government or academia, or to build a platform for future business development. I guess my point is that everyone is here on behalf of an interest, even if it is theirs personally. And this is the lens through which we view the “overall best interests of Internet users.” I may focus on the desire of an Internet user / domain registrant to launch a business or blog in a frictionless environment, unencumbered by confusing rules and regulations. Others could focus on the trust element, that users should have a reasonable level of confidence that people and organizations they are engaging with online are trustworthy and who they claim to be. Another group might want to participate online in a way that doesn’t expose them to frivolous legal risk or compromise their individual privacy. The beautiful thing about the Internet is that all of these legitimate “overall best interests” can intersect in the same “Internet user”. We see this in companies like GoDaddy, where we want the best experience for our customers, but also want to protect them from common online scams and fraud. We see people misappropriating our name & brand, and we hear complaints from customers about their information being harvested for spam & robocalls. I try to be mindful of all these interests, and bring them to my work at ICANN. So ultimately it is a question of balancing, rather than competing, interests. I believe that all of the either-or, black-and-white problems were solved decades ago, and we’ve now taken up permanent residence in a nebulous gray area. Not sure if this was the response you were looking for, but I hope it was helpful. Thanks— J. On Oct 12, 2017, 21:00 -0500, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>>, wrote: Thanks James. This is a good reminder. Just seeking a clarification on one point: [cid:image001.png@01D3436A.29F43160] Would you say that PDPs are characterized by individuals acting in the overall best interests of Internet users and the security and stability of the Internet “irrespective of personal interests and the interests of the entity to which an individual might owe their appointment”? Wouldn’t it be a bit strange if we expected representatives of various entities that have a financial stake in the GNSO policy process to take positions and make contributions counter to the interests of their employers when participating in PDPs? (Honestly interested in your candid thoughts on this.) Thank you, Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office 520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image006.png@01D34409.A9DE29E0] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 11:10 AM To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Reminder regarding Expected Standards of Behavior Sent on behalf of the GNSO Council leadership team ================ Dear Colleagues - Several recent interactions on PDP working group calls and mailing lists have been referred to the GNSO Chairs (Heather, Donna, and I). After review, our level of concern is such that we felt a refresher on ICANN's Expected Standards of Behavior was warranted. A link to this document is provided below, but in general terms we are asking all participants in PDP working groups to elevate the level of discourse on calls and mailing lists to reflect a respectful and professional environment for our work. With this in mind, don’t attack fellow volunteers personally, or question their motives, or presume to know their positions without giving them a chance to present it. Humor (especially sarcasm) doesn’t go over well in emails or AC chat sessions, and usually doesn’t translate at all. Refrain from escalating or retaliating to negative comments. And, above all, remember that our shared objective is not to “win” on any given issue, but to seek out and build upon areas of common understanding. The Expected Standards of Behavior can be found here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2012-05-15-en<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_pages_expected-2Dstandards-2D2012-2D05-2D15-2Den&d=DwMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=nLTnlCjpaKa0PAoZ3Oo9Hth_qedPM7PZZR9XOAEmRW8&s=rifMmlUtCDfJQ-7waiDNprOF9hRGXjwUtK_MFiJDj4g&e=>. I know we’re all accustomed to just “click through” this text when joining a meeting, but I’m now asking everyone take a minute to two to review it again. Thank you for your help with this matter. J. ---------------- James Bladel GNSO Chair ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521<tel:2510-2521>. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

I second that I’ve witnessed it and I see the differences. Very true Kris

On 15 Oct 2017, at 19:21, Vanda Scartezini <vanda@scartezini.org> wrote:

PDP process is certainly focused on GNSO interest in have a clear process. The clear and transparent process in itself can contribute to user to have a better service, as such, will be in their best interest. For my understanding, good business will be focused on their own profit but to have a good profit in a very competitive environment you shall provide a better service. GNSO is much more focused on better services than ccNSO since in several countries there is no much competition and costs. For instance can be higher so, not t all for the best interest of internet users. But t=not the competitive environment of gTLDs.

Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

From: <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@lrrc.com> Date: Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 23:00 To: 'Terri Agnew' <terri.agnew@icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Reminder regarding Expected Standards of Behavior

Thanks James. This is a good reminder. Just seeking a clarification on one point: <image001.png>

Would you say that PDPs are characterized by individuals acting in the overall best interests of Internet users and the security and stability of the Internet “irrespective of personal interests and the interests of the entity to which an individual might owe their appointment”?

Wouldn’t it be a bit strange if we expected representatives of various entities that have a financial stake in the GNSO policy process to take positions and make contributions counter to the interests of their employers when participating in PDPs? (Honestly interested in your candid thoughts on this.)

Thank you, Anne

Anne E. Aikman-Scalese

Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com _____________________________ <image004.png> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com

From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 11:10 AM To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Cc: gnso-secs@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Reminder regarding Expected Standards of Behavior

Sent on behalf of the GNSO Council leadership team

================

Dear Colleagues -

Several recent interactions on PDP working group calls and mailing lists have been referred to the GNSO Chairs (Heather, Donna, and I). After review, our level of concern is such that we felt a refresher on ICANN's Expected Standards of Behavior was warranted. A link to this document is provided below, but in general terms we are asking all participants in PDP working groups to elevate the level of discourse on calls and mailing lists to reflect a respectful and professional environment for our work.

With this in mind, don’t attack fellow volunteers personally, or question their motives, or presume to know their positions without giving them a chance to present it. Humor (especially sarcasm) doesn’t go over well in emails or AC chat sessions, and usually doesn’t translate at all. Refrain from escalating or retaliating to negative comments. And, above all, remember that our shared objective is not to “win” on any given issue, but to seek out and build upon areas of common understanding.

The Expected Standards of Behavior can be found here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2012-05-15-en. I know we’re all accustomed to just “click through” this text when joining a meeting, but I’m now asking everyone take a minute to two to review it again.

Thank you for your help with this matter.

J.

---------------- James Bladel GNSO Chair

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg