Dear SSC members, Seeing no additional input on the format of the draft poll, staff has gone ahead and opened the poll: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TZXL5W5. We are still determining the best date and time for the next meeting. As a reminder, please fill out the doodle here<https://doodle.com/poll/qxv64b2i3z357sib?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link>. The first possible slot in the doodle poll is Wednesday 6 October at 12:00 UTC, so the tentative deadline for the poll is Wednesday 6 October at 11:00 UTC. We will likely be able to extend this deadline once we have the next call scheduled, so that the poll closes shortly before the call. If you have any questions or concerns, please share them on list. Kind regards, Julie and Emily From: Gnso-ssc <gnso-ssc-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund via Gnso-ssc <gnso-ssc@icann.org> Reply to: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, 29 September 2021 at 21:02 To: "gnso-ssc@icann.org" <gnso-ssc@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-ssc] Notes & Action Items - SSC meeting - 29 September 2021 at 18:00 UTC Dear SSC members, Please find below notes and action items from today’s call on Wednesday, 29 September 2021 at 18:00 UTC. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items: 1. Staff will update the draft poll to allow optional comments after each question that asks them to rank candidates (COMPLETED). See the updated poll at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=4bILN8u1cNTLCwI9o0Juve_2BMYmrqgeC... [surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=4bILN8...> 2. SSC members will review the format of the poll only and provide comments, if any, not later than 24 hours after the 29 Sept meeting – by 1900 UTC on Thursday, 30 Sept. 3. Once the 24-hour period for SSC members to provide feedback on the format of the poll has closed and SSC members approve the format, staff will open the poll for SSC members; it will close shortly before the next meeting. 4. Staff will send a Doodle poll to schedule the next meeting. 5. Staff will gather the results for discussion at the next meeting. Notes: Proposed Agenda SSC Meeting – 29 September 2021 1. Roll Call & SOI updates 2. Welcome from the Chair * Reminder that some terms are coming to an end for SSC members at the Annual General Meeting (ICANN72) – new appointments are due 3 weeks after the AGM. Please coordinate with your appointing organization. Staff will send a follow-up note soon. 3. Overview of the assignment and next steps – selection of GNSO Council Liaison to the SubPro ODP * Please see the assignment at: https://community.icann.org/display/GSSC/GNSO+Council+Liaison+to+SubPro+ODP+... on the wiki. * Overview of the Liaison role to the SubPro ODP: * ODP is a fairly new tool. Only the second one to be initiated after the SSAD ODP. * Goal is to have more tools to support the Board in its consideration of the policy recommendation. * Sept 12th Board directed ICANN to initiate an ODP, although there had already been discussion on the ODP. * See SubPro ODP: https://www.icann.org/subpro-odp * Meant to be a conduit between the ODP and GNSO – to the extent that ICANN Org has questions the liaison channels them back to Council. From the wiki: Responsibilities * Serve as the primary contact between the ODP team and the GNSO Council to facilitate and streamline communications on identified issues that pertain to the intent or substance of the policy recommendations. Convey relevant information from the GNSO Council to the ODP team and vice versa. * Provide relevant background information to ICANN org upon request, in consultation with the GNSO Council, as needed. * Ensure all communications between the liaison and the ODP team are fully transparent. Desired Skills and Experience Criteria used to evaluate candidates: * Understanding of the specific and limited nature of the role and ability to perform liaison duties with the necessary restraint. * Previous involvement with the SubPro PDP and in-depth knowledge of the subject matter. * Demonstrated ability to act in a neutral manner, especially when there are divergent views within the GNSO. * Familiarity with both the dynamics and the operations of the GNSO Council. * Availability to devote the necessary time to this effort, including attending meetings with the ODP team upon request and providing regular updates to the Council. Discussion: * Question: Some of those applying for the liaison are Council members, who also would be reviewing policy. Thought that might be a conflict of interest. Answer: Shouldn’t be any constraints on multiple roles. Also, the Council has already approved the recommendations/policies. * Good question (above): It is not in the requirements and the Council is not providing guidance on conflicts, but this role is very limited. The role of the liaison does not serve on the ODP and does not deliberate. The liaison is a channel between the ODP and the Council. * This implementation is very critical; we also have to keep in mind the amount of work required on this task. Consider what the candidates bring to this role, specifically with respect to the SubPro. * Important to assess capacity and candidates skills and experience, but note that the ODP is a pre-implementation process. The liaison will have nothing to do with implementation. * The role is expected to require about 5 hours of work a month. * We might want to take into consideration how GNSO operates when looking at the individuals. * Important to note that this is a very narrow and specific role. This is not part of the implementation. The ODP is about doing an analysis to help the Board make its decision. * The liaison is the go-between to help bring questions from ICANN Org to the GNSO Council. * Note re: conflicts of interest – the EOI includes a question about interests in the SubPro, as an extension of the Statement of Interest from the GNSO Operating Procedures. Generally speaking in the GNSO community members wear a lot of different hats. Disclosure of interests generally does not prevent community members from participating. If the SSC sees a conflict of interest for performing the role, they should be very clear in the rationale. Poll to Evaluate Candidates: * Question: Will it be ok to have place for comments after each of the rankings? Answer: Yes. Staff can add this as an option. * If SSC members think there is enough information to answer a question, they could mark it as “N/A” and provide a rationale in the comments box. * Staff will update the poll accordingly and circulate the revised draft for review. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Staff will update the draft poll to allow optional comments after each question that asks them to rank candidates (COMPLETED). See the updated poll at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=4bILN8u1cNTLCwI9o0Juve_2BMYmrqgeC... [surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=4bILN8...> 2. SSC members review the format of the poll only and provide comments, if any, not later than 24 hours after the 29 Sept meeting – by 1900 UTC on Thursday, 30 Sept. 3. Once the 24-hour period for SSC members to provide feedback on the format of the poll has closed and SSC members approve the format, staff will open the poll for SSC members; it will close shortly before the next meeting. 4. Staff will send a Doodle poll to schedule the next meeting. 5. Staff will gather the results for discussion at the next meeting. 4. AOB: None.