December 2013 - Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl

Reminder: Re: Revised draft agenda for 19 Dec meeting
by Marika Konings Jan. 9, 2014

Jan. 9, 2014

Reminder, please take note of agenda below and the related action items and add any additional comments / edits you may have to the attached document ahead of tomorrow's meeting. Thanks, Marika From: <Gomes>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Friday 13 December 2013 20:11 To: "gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org" <gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Revised draft agenda for 19 Dec meeting P&I WG Principles Sub-team proposed agenda for 19 Dec 13 (version 2) 1. Discuss Cheryl¹s idea and proposal for an overarching principle 2. Brainstorm on how the overarching principle could impact the content and organization of our list of principles 3. Discuss J. Scott¹s idea of taking two examples of policy implementation from the past (one where the current system worked without controversy and another that is perceived as having not worked in the current system) so we can put them under the microscope to help us frame the principles a. General discussion b. Should we do this? c. If so: i. At what point in our work should we do this? ii. How should we accomplish it? iii. What two policies should we choose? 4. Explore ways to proceed in developing some criteria for when more community involvement may be needed in the implementation process 5. Time permitting, continue the discussion on some key terms introduced in our 12 Dec call such as policy neutral¹. Comments, edits, etc. are welcome. Chuck ³This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately.²

4 6

Revised working principles document for review
by Marika Konings Jan. 9, 2014

Jan. 9, 2014

Dear All, Following our call today, please find attached the revised version of the proposed working principles for your review. The next meeting of the sub-team is scheduled for 9 January at 21.00 UTC for 90 minutes. You are encouraged to share any comments / edits you may have ahead of the meeting. The document has also been posted on the wiki (see https://community.icann.org/x/AimfAg) Happy holidays!! Marika

4 6

Holiday card (electronic version)
by Glen de Saint Géry Dec. 29, 2013

Dec. 29, 2013

[cid:578EC140-800D-4AE9-B80A-BC051E7CE466]

1 0

Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation Working Principles Sub- Team meeting - 19 December 2013
by Julia Charvolen Dec. 20, 2013

Dec. 20, 2013

Dear All, The next Policy and Implementation Principles Sub-Team is scheduled for Thursday 09 January 2014 at 2100 UTC for 90 minutes. Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working Principles Sub-Team call held on Thursday 19 December 2013 at 21:00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20131219-en.mp3 Attendees: Cheryl Langdon-Orr – ALAC Alan Greenberg – At-Large Greg Shatan – IPC Chuck Gomes- RySG Nic Steinbach- RrSG Avri Doria – NCSG Jonathan Frost – RySG Tom Barett – RrSG Michael Graham - IPC Apology: J.Scott Evans ICANN staff: Mary Wong Marika Konings Julia Charvolen ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page:https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag Thank you. Kind regards, Julia Charvolen For GNSO Secretariat Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 19 December 2013: Marika Konings:Welcome to the PI Principles Sub-Team meeting of 19 December 2013 Julia Charvolen:Dear all, please note that the Adobe Connect is has no audio connected, in order to participate in the meeting please be so kind to dial int the phone bridge Julia Charvolen:Passcode: PI Cheryl Langdon-Orr:ok but why not?? and I assume I have dialout? Mary Wong:Cheryl, we are dialing out to you very shortly. Greg Shatan:I am now on the phone bridge. Julia Charvolen:Thomas Barett is on the call Julia Charvolen:Avri Doria joined the adobe connect Julia Charvolen:Avri has not yet joined the phone bridge Avri Doria:oh, we dont have voice. very welll, will find the phone. Julia Charvolen:Thank you Avri Julia Charvolen:Passcode : PI Julia Charvolen:Avri Doria joined the phone bridge Michael R. Graham:Is there a reason for specifying "PRIMARY stakeholders" ? Greg Shatan:Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our three weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our four...no... amongst our weapons.... amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again. Nic Steinbach:"all" as opposed to "the primary"? Michael R. Graham:I would also remove the "such as" perhaps? Greg Shatan:Easy for you to say. Michael R. Graham:@Greg . . . Agreed! Jonathan Frost:I might say "among others" at the end of the list Jonathan Frost:do make it clear that the list is nto intended to be exhaustive Nic Steinbach:unfortunately I am going to have to jump off this call. good luck with the rest of this call. i look forward to catching up on the recording. Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agree with you Jonathan Michael R. Graham:@Gregory Perhaps, but cutlery can help define the experience. Greg Shatan:@Michael ; agreed, but the restaurant has to be open for anyone to have any kind of experience.... Marika Konings:I've put the whole first paragraph now there Michael R. Graham:Could we change "A stakeholder refers" to read: "'Stakeholder' refers to"? Michael R. Graham:I know the Definitions sub-team has a good amount on its plate without doing so, but would it be useful for it to consider refining a definition of "Multi-Stakeholder Model" if it has time? Cheryl Langdon-Orr:guess so Michael as long as it is limted to an ICANN context Avri Doria:of course now we also speak of administrtion, wtch more and more things get grouped under administration. Jonathan Frost:I agree with strengthening the must. Michael R. Graham:Agree -- tough "are" means they must or they are not proper GNSO processes. Michael R. Graham:Sorry, meant "Although" not "tough" Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Seasons Greetings to you all talk next year :-)

1 0

Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation Working Principles Sub- Team meeting - 12 December 2013
by Nathalie Peregrine Dec. 16, 2013

Dec. 16, 2013

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working Principles Sub-Team call held on Thursday 12 December 2013 at 19:00 UTC: https://icann.box.com/shared/static/2tpcsccdqtjk9kqlas5b.mp3 Attendees: Michael Graham – IPC Cheryl Langdon-Orr – ALAC Alan Greenberg – At-Large Greg Shatan – IPC Chuck Gomes- RySG Nic Steinbach- RrSG Avri Doria - NCSG Apology: none ICANN staff: Mary Wong Marika Konings Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page:https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Peregrine For GNSO Secretariat Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 12 December 2013: Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, wwelcome to the Policy and IMplementation Working Principles Sub team Meeting on Thursday 12 December 2013 Nathalie Peregrine:Please be aware that there will be NO audio enabled in the AC room today, please all dial into the audio bridge passcode PI Mary Wong:There's a bit of a wait for the operator. Nathalie Peregrine:yes i waited too today Alan Greenberg:Yup, here too Alan Greenberg:3+ minutes Marika Konings:Same here... Alan Greenberg:On now Greg Shatan:I'm on as well. Greg Shatan:With apologies, I will need to get off around the half-hour. Michael R. Graham:I will as well, sorry. Nic Steinbach:trying to connect via audio now Cheryl Langdon-Orr:no dial to me either Marika Konings:@CLO - we are trying to dial out to you, but we are having some challenges reaching you Nathalie Peregrine:Cheryl, we have tried your hotel nr and they are not picking up Cheryl Langdon-Orr:chcked line I have dial tone Nathalie Peregrine:can we try your mobile? Cheryl Langdon-Orr:back in Syd Cheryl Langdon-Orr:use landline Nathalie Peregrine:ok! Cheryl Langdon-Orr:no mobile on site at home Nathalie Peregrine:I wasn't sure if you wre home yet Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Sorry Nathalie my Flt back was yesterday afternoon Nathalie Peregrine::) Nathalie Peregrine:we're setting up a dial out to your landline Cheryl Langdon-Orr:feel free to check my calendar my life is am open book to you ladies Cheryl Langdon-Orr:bog standard admin stuff that is "non-substantive"=> "execution" Michael R. Graham:In re: "0B" -- The Work Plan subgroup divided Tasks into the 5 deliverables set forth in the WG Charter. We then determined that two preliminary tasks were called for: A. Coming up with Working Definitions of Terms the WG could use in our discussions to avoid confusion and spending inordinate time discussing what we meant by those terms in our discussions, and B. Identify general "Working Principles" that we understand underlay the existing understanding of the Policy & Implementation process within the GNSO. Since these were "pre-deliverables" which we understood would change as the WG progressed in its work, we used "0" as the deliverable number. Hence: 0A and 0B in the designation of Deliverables. Cheryl Langdon-Orr:absolutly Greg... this could end up a Road Block "tool" Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yes Alan the Community "Impact Test" principal is important here...and Yes I capatalised the term Alan Greenberg:@Nic, certainly HOW we make that judgement is going to be challenging, but that is a later step. Nic Steinbach:@Alan - Sounds good. I think the principle should acknowledge that affected parties should have some remedey or process to allow them to alert the impementation teams that they are affected. Nic Steinbach:is it possible that the definitions team can shed some light on "implentation" ? Nic Steinbach:at least in this context.... Nic Steinbach:i feel like we are talking about different things. Alan Greenberg:I am certainly hopeful of that.. And working hard towards that end. I was the one who suggested a focus on definitions BECAUE the words are used in such a large number of ways now. Mary Wong:@Nic, that sub-team has it as one of the words to be defined, yes. Nic Steinbach:great. it will be intresting to re-evaluate these principles in light of their definitions. Cheryl Langdon-Orr:not saying Implementation is not under a MSM it is; but that ALL componant parts of such Implementation needs to be also RE-subject to a NEW or Refreshed MSM process... Chuck Gomes:@ Greg - Agree on database Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yup Greg absolutly... Chuck Gomes:I like the term policy neutral Nic Steinbach:policy neutral - like that concept Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yup nice term let's usse it as a Term Cheryl Langdon-Orr:thus add to Deffinitions... Avri Doria:I don't believe there's policy neutral action Cheryl Langdon-Orr:really Avri??? the data base one??? Chuck Gomes:@ avri - Choosing a database is not policy neutral? Avri Doria:Indeed. The tool used determine the services provided and constrains interface available. Cheryl Langdon-Orr:orbthe server choicesnmor the nimber of and qualifications of staff allocatef to a task?? Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Nope that takesm us into Micronmanagement of Admin pricesses of policy implementataion to Community on a،pll things I disagree Michael R. Graham:@Alan -- Originally we had hoped the Definitions would be complete so the terms as defined could be used in these Policy discussions. Certainly, discovering additional terms or uses that require definition was anticipated, and I would not limit developing Definitions to aid in understanding and discussion to that sub-team. Cheryl Langdon-Orr:but that comes back to theproposed principal of Impact Test comes in Avri Alan Greenberg:My working definitions, which are probably NOT the ones to use in the long-term, are :POlicy: Whatever the GNSO approves in its PDP (or other methodology); Implementation design: the decisions which may impact community during the post-Policy work; Execution: the part of current implementation which is "policy neutral",. Nic Steinbach:policy, implentation, execution. Nic Steinbach:that is a product manager like flow :) like it. Greg Shatan:Consider this more of a spectrum. Policy Neutral may be like Absolute Zero. Maybe nothing is "perfectly" policy neutral. But, I will put on a sweater before absolute zero. Similarly, we need to treat things as essentially policy-neutral at some point. Alan Greenberg:@Nic, note that the last two phases may be iterative. Greg Shatan:@Avri. If there are specifications in the final report as to what the database has to do, I agree that choosing a database that fails to do it would not be policy neutral. I think we are assuming that the hypothetical databases under consideration all meet the needs expressed by the policy. Greg Shatan:And with that, I must go. Nic Steinbach:@Alan - I think we are on the same page. Greg Shatan:As Potter Stewart, might have said "I can't define policy, but I know it when I see it...." Cheryl Langdon-Orr:So true Greg...Art, Porn, and now Policy.... Michael R. Graham:I'm working on how those three go together . . . Nic Steinbach:3 Nic Steinbach:defintiely linked to 1 Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yes Nic 3 is the one I have open on my desk top as I said my last comment... Nic Steinbach:can the next sub meeting include some pickeled pork! Nic Steinbach:that sounds delicious Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Nic I always photo jnl my events so you can always browse the images Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I'll share a table pic at our next call... Nic Steinbach:i am afraid to ask for a link. haven't had lunch and that sounds like torture. Nic Steinbach:looking forward to your pic next call! EnCirca - Tom Barrett:sorry guys. i had the time off by an hour. is the call still on? i'm on hold on the conf call centre Cheryl Langdon-Orr:thanks Marika most helpful Marika Konings:@Tom - we are wrapping up EnCirca - Tom Barrett:ok Nic Steinbach:i have to hop off - can make a call next week, but am ok with waitng until afterwards... Cheryl Langdon-Orr:bye Marika Konings:Next week we'll meet on Thursday at 21.00 UTC Marika Konings:call details will be circulated shortly ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Gnso-definitions-subteam-policyimpl mailing list Gnso-definitions-subteam-policyimpl(a)icann.org<mailto:Gnso-definitions-subteam-policyimpl@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-definitions-subteam-policyimpl

1 0

Latest version of draft principles for review
by Marika Konings Dec. 14, 2013

Dec. 14, 2013

Dear All, Following our call yesterday, please find below some notes I took in relation to the discussion on the draft principles (for a detailed report of the meeting, please review the transcript and/or recording). Attached you will find the latest version of the draft principles (note I've accepted all the redlines to facilitate your review). You are encouraged to add any further comments / proposed edits to the document itself ahead of the next meeting (Thursday 19 December at 21.00 UTC). Thanks, Marika * From Alan: Implementation has taken on so many different meanings and different phases that is the reason why we are here. There are certain phases that do not need to be based in the multi-stakeholder model. Only when there is substantive impact to stakeholders, then it needs to be based in the multi-stakeholder model. If it is purely execution this can be handled by staff without a need for a multi-stakeholder process. If the PDP team had thought about the issue, they would have put the details in impact was defined / foreseen as part of policy discussions, it may not necessarily require community input / discussion? Involvement should not equate to veto. Need some working definitions of some of the terms we are using. * Greg: Agrees with Alan multi-stakeholder concept cannot be applied the same way in a policy process or an implementation process. Nuance needs to be added to express that. Timeframe for policy and implementation is different. Definitions and principles are tied. Is there policy neutral implementation (execution), i.e. decisions don¹t have any impact on the policy recommendations while on the other hand you have implementation decisions that affect the policy? Consider integrating principle 3 with 1, and some of the administrative ones. * Nic: How can you determine who/how someone is impacted? * Michael: Multi-stakeholder model looks after interests of all parties. In considering the whole process, we need to take that into account when defining this principle. * Chuck: Implementation even though it may be straightforward and may not need further community consultation does not go against the multi-stakeholder model. It may just be requiring the originating body to confirm that implementation is as intended by the policy recommendations. Also note that all these principles are interrelated. Possible rewording: The need for multi-stakeholder principles does not end when you go from policy to implementation. Should there be a sub principle that says criteria should be developed and enforced when a multi-stakeholder process is required? Objective is to avoid situation whereby Board/Staff decide that something is implementation and does not require community involvement / feedback. Should this sub-team develop some guidelines or should this be done by the WG? Is it possible to define principles / sub-principles. * CLO: other terms such as substantive impact¹ may need defining in this context. Consider adding overarching principle that makes sure that articulate the enshrined principles of the multi-stakeholder model and input sought as part of policy discussions. Other statements may come in that will add to this effort.

4 4

Revised draft agenda for 19 Dec meeting
by Gomes, Chuck Dec. 13, 2013

Dec. 13, 2013

P&I WG Principles Sub-team proposed agenda for 19 Dec 13 (version 2) 1. Discuss Cheryl's idea and proposal for an overarching principle 2. Brainstorm on how the overarching principle could impact the content and organization of our list of principles 3. Discuss J. Scott's idea of taking two examples of policy implementation from the past (one where the current system worked without controversy and another that is perceived as having not worked in the current system) so we can put them under the microscope to help us frame the principles a. General discussion b. Should we do this? c. If so: i. At what point in our work should we do this? ii. How should we accomplish it? iii. What two policies should we choose? 4. Explore ways to proceed in developing some criteria for when more community involvement may be needed in the implementation process 5. Time permitting, continue the discussion on some key terms introduced in our 12 Dec call such as 'policy neutral'. Comments, edits, etc. are welcome. Chuck "This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately."

1 0

Draft principles - comments
by Marika Konings Dec. 11, 2013

Dec. 11, 2013

To kick things off, I've added a couple of comments / questions as well as proposed edits to the draft provided by Chuck (see attached). Best regards, Marika

4 10

Deadline for input and doodle poll to schedule next meeting
by Marika Konings Dec. 10, 2013

Dec. 10, 2013

Based on your feedback received to date, let's set Tuesday 10 December as a deadline for sub-team input on the draft principles based on the first draft developed by Chuck, taking into account the other background materials (see https://community.icann.org/x/AimfAg) In order to schedule a call to discuss the feedback received and possibly finalise the working principles for review by the WG, please complete the following doodle poll: http://www.doodle.com/cdw5v5iee4uzuhyr. Thanks, Marika From: <Gomes>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Monday 2 December 2013 18:52 To: "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan(a)reedsmith.com>, 'Nic Steinbach' <nic(a)name.com>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Cc: "gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org" <gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team I am okay with any of the dates mentioned except December 8th which is a Sunday. I also am happy to start the discussion on the list. I look forward to responses, additions, etc. to the principles I suggested. Chuck From: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Shatan, Gregory S. Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 11:48 AM To: 'Nic Steinbach'; Marika Konings Cc: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team Agree on all points below. Greg From:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org[mailto:gnso-subteam0b-polic yimpl-bounces(a)icann.org]On Behalf Of Nic Steinbach Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 9:22 AM To: Marika Konings Cc: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team Hi Marika, I am sorry for the delay. I suspect that like myself some others on this thread may have been on holiday last week. I have completed the Doodle Poll, but like your second proposal a bit more. My only suggestion would be that we move the Thursday Day 12 date up a bit (Dec 8 or Dec 10) to ensure that we have all had time to review and potentially respond to each other's feedback. Best, Nic On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> wrote: Chuck, thank you very much for kicking this off. All, please note that so far there have only been two responses to the doodle poll. That doesn't seem sufficient to confirm a meeting. Would you prefer to start working on this on the mailing list? Chuck's document seems a good starting point. Maybe we could forego a call for now but set a deadline by when sub-team members are expected to comment on the draft provided by Chuck (taking into account the documents to be reviewed below)? How about Thursday 12 December? This would allow us then to schedule a call for the week of 16 December to possibly finalise the list of working principles? I look forward to receiving your feedback. Marika From: <Gomes>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Monday 2 December 2013 02:47 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, "gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org" <gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team The attached list of principles is provided as a starting point for discussion for the P&I WG Principles sub-team. I developed most of them from a review of the references Marika provided below plus some of the early documents she provided to the WG. I also included one from the work of the P&I DT along with a couple of my own. As you will note in the introduction to the list ³It is critical that these be critiqued freely and openly and that other principles are considered as well.² Chuck From:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 5:10 AM To: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team Dear All, Thank you for joining the deliverable 0B sub-team. As per the work plan, the objective of this sub team is to 'Derive from ICANN charters and materials "working principles" that should underpin GNSO Policy and Implementation-related discussions and determinations'. The sub-team is expected to develop these working principles by reviewing: * What guidance do ICANN core values (Bylaws Article 1, Section 2 - http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#I) directly provide with regard to policy development work and policy implementation efforts? (e.g., multi-stakeholder participation) * What guidance do other ICANN Core values provide that relate indirectly to policy development and policy implementation? (e.g., effective & timely processes) * Questions for discussion contained in the Policy versus Implementation Draft Framework prepared by ICANN Staff * Review GNSO WG Guidelines and PDP Manual to identify possible existing principles (explicitly or implicitly) * Review proposed principles in staff discussion paper (see abstract attached) To date, the following WG members have volunteered for this sub-team: Greg Shatan, Cheryl Landon-Orr, Tim Ruiz, Tom Barrett, Alan Greenberg, Avri Doria, Chuck Gomes and Nic Steinbach. Would any of you be willing to take the lead for this sub-team? In order to schedule a time/date for a first meeting of this sub-team, please complete the following doodle poll: http://www.doodle.com/v8kyx4evuri69thx. With best regards, Marika _______________________________________________ Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl mailing list Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl -- Nic Steinbach * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00

3 6

Reminder - please complete the doodle poll
by Marika Konings Dec. 5, 2013

Dec. 5, 2013

Reminder, please complete the doodle poll if you have not done so yet: http://www.doodle.com/cdw5v5iee4uzuhyr. Thanks, Marika From: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday 3 December 2013 15:56 To: Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com>, "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan(a)reedsmith.com>, 'Nic Steinbach' <nic(a)name.com> Cc: "gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org" <gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Deadline for input and doodle poll to schedule next meeting Based on your feedback received to date, let's set Tuesday 10 December as a deadline for sub-team input on the draft principles based on the first draft developed by Chuck, taking into account the other background materials (see https://community.icann.org/x/AimfAg) In order to schedule a call to discuss the feedback received and possibly finalise the working principles for review by the WG, please complete the following doodle poll: http://www.doodle.com/cdw5v5iee4uzuhyr. Thanks, Marika From: <Gomes>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Monday 2 December 2013 18:52 To: "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan(a)reedsmith.com>, 'Nic Steinbach' <nic(a)name.com>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Cc: "gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org" <gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team I am okay with any of the dates mentioned except December 8th which is a Sunday. I also am happy to start the discussion on the list. I look forward to responses, additions, etc. to the principles I suggested. Chuck From:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Shatan, Gregory S. Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 11:48 AM To: 'Nic Steinbach'; Marika Konings Cc: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team Agree on all points below. Greg From:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org[mailto:gnso-subteam0b-polic yimpl-bounces(a)icann.org]On Behalf Of Nic Steinbach Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 9:22 AM To: Marika Konings Cc: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team Hi Marika, I am sorry for the delay. I suspect that like myself some others on this thread may have been on holiday last week. I have completed the Doodle Poll, but like your second proposal a bit more. My only suggestion would be that we move the Thursday Day 12 date up a bit (Dec 8 or Dec 10) to ensure that we have all had time to review and potentially respond to each other's feedback. Best, Nic On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> wrote: Chuck, thank you very much for kicking this off. All, please note that so far there have only been two responses to the doodle poll. That doesn't seem sufficient to confirm a meeting. Would you prefer to start working on this on the mailing list? Chuck's document seems a good starting point. Maybe we could forego a call for now but set a deadline by when sub-team members are expected to comment on the draft provided by Chuck (taking into account the documents to be reviewed below)? How about Thursday 12 December? This would allow us then to schedule a call for the week of 16 December to possibly finalise the list of working principles? I look forward to receiving your feedback. Marika From: <Gomes>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Monday 2 December 2013 02:47 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, "gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org" <gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team The attached list of principles is provided as a starting point for discussion for the P&I WG Principles sub-team. I developed most of them from a review of the references Marika provided below plus some of the early documents she provided to the WG. I also included one from the work of the P&I DT along with a couple of my own. As you will note in the introduction to the list ³It is critical that these be critiqued freely and openly and that other principles are considered as well.² Chuck From:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 5:10 AM To: gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] Scheduling first meeting of the PI Working Principles Sub-Team Dear All, Thank you for joining the deliverable 0B sub-team. As per the work plan, the objective of this sub team is to 'Derive from ICANN charters and materials "working principles" that should underpin GNSO Policy and Implementation-related discussions and determinations'. The sub-team is expected to develop these working principles by reviewing: * What guidance do ICANN core values (Bylaws Article 1, Section 2 - http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#I) directly provide with regard to policy development work and policy implementation efforts? (e.g., multi-stakeholder participation) * What guidance do other ICANN Core values provide that relate indirectly to policy development and policy implementation? (e.g., effective & timely processes) * Questions for discussion contained in the Policy versus Implementation Draft Framework prepared by ICANN Staff * Review GNSO WG Guidelines and PDP Manual to identify possible existing principles (explicitly or implicitly) * Review proposed principles in staff discussion paper (see abstract attached) To date, the following WG members have volunteered for this sub-team: Greg Shatan, Cheryl Landon-Orr, Tim Ruiz, Tom Barrett, Alan Greenberg, Avri Doria, Chuck Gomes and Nic Steinbach. Would any of you be willing to take the lead for this sub-team? In order to schedule a time/date for a first meeting of this sub-team, please complete the following doodle poll: http://www.doodle.com/v8kyx4evuri69thx. With best regards, Marika _______________________________________________ Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl mailing list Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl -- Nic Steinbach * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00

2 1