Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working Principles Sub-Team call held on Thursday 6 February 2014 at 21:00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20140206-en.mp3 Attendees: Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC Chuck Gomes- RySG Alan Greenberg - At-Large Avri Doria - NCSG Tom Barrett - RrSG Greg Shatan - IPC Michael Graham - IPC Nic Steinbach- RrSG Apologies: Mary Wong ICANN staff: 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 06 February 2014: Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the PI Principles Sub-Team meeting of 6 February 2014 Nathalie Peregrine:Alan Greenberg has joined the room Nathalie Peregrine:Avri is not on the audio bridge Cheryl Langdon-Orr:include it as a principal Nathalie Peregrine:Michael graham has joined the AC roon Michael Graham:And calling in shortly. Michael Graham:In re: "Impact" analysis -- whether a process suggestion or a principle (and I would question whether it is a principle) could we say instead of "should be conducted" write "should be addressed in Policy Development and Implementation"? Michael Graham:P.S. I have audio but not mic Michael Graham:Is a) not the same as b) except as applied to implementation portion of equation? Avri Doria:i think it is really premature to accuse impact analysis of being dog whistle words. Greg Shatan:I hope that is true -- but I remember how "impact" was being used around Durban-time. Happy to keep it from being freighted with implicit meanings.... Greg Shatan:I actually agree with Alan. Michael Graham:I would agree with Alan. While the first sentence in a is fine, the second is a description how that principle should be implemented -- and should be left for discussion by WG. Avri Doria:NOT a BUZZ WORD Alan Greenberg:breaking up Cheryl Langdon-Orr:+++from me @avri Michael Graham:The PRINCIPLE is that the impact of Policy on stakeholders should be assessed. Marika 2:@Michael - I agree. How that is done should be for the WG to discuss (in my opinion) Alan Greenberg:@Michael, I agree Avri Doria:i cn liv with calling it an analysis of the impact it the term is so bothersone. but it has to be more that a consideration. Marika 2:What if we change a to 'Assessing the impact on stakeholders is an essential part of the policy development process' Marika 2:and leave it at that for now? Michael Graham:@Marika I would agree. Greg Shatan:New ICANN title: "Default Chair" Avri Doria:I prefer "an analysis of the impact ... Michael Graham:But it's not Chuck's default. Avri Doria:why is it not a principle? Michael Graham:Because it is a policy putting into effect the policy. Michael Graham:To clarify: I was referring to b) and c), not a) Avri Doria:i supported deconstructing the term. Alan Greenberg:Can't trust cunning lawyers! Michael Graham:@ Alan ;-) Cheryl Langdon-Orr:what about the non cunning sub species :-) Michael Graham:I would keep "all" insofar as this is an aspirational principle. Alan Greenberg:I like all, but accept Avri's comments and can live without it. Michael Graham:Either is good. Avri Doria:i can live with it. just think it doesn't add much. i cant even aspire to all. Nic Steinbach:strongly okay with either Tom Barrett - EnCirca:on hold Tom Barrett - EnCirca:my concern is that "all" will be an excuse to study the impact with no end Michael Graham:FYI -- IPC is now considering response to our Request for Input. Avri Doria:we can put the word fascilitate somewhere in the sentence. Avri Doria:of course spelled correctly: facilitate (?) Michael Graham:Have to drop off. Will listen to recording of rest of discussion. Tom Barrett - EnCirca:I read this as incorporating a requirement for checkpoints during the implementation where impact-related questions are asked. Tom Barrett - EnCirca:by the way, the 'conference call center' appears to be on break. I can't get through. Alan Greenberg:ok Alan Greenberg:litmus test Avri Doria:a non maskable interupt Alan Greenberg:Yup! Alan Greenberg:And I am old enoughto remember when they were called "traps". Which adds another connotation. Avri Doria:i tend to remember as nmi Nic Steinbach:i will have to setup away just for a second Nic Steinbach:step* Avri Doria:but i recognize trap Tom Barrett - EnCirca:bingo! Marika 2:Tom, could you please type your proposed wording in the chat? Alan Greenberg:I gather that this is a 90 minute call... Really wish the announcement would make it clear. Tom Barrett - EnCirca:there should be a mechanism to flag unanticipated outcomes that impact the community Avri Doria:2 sentences is ALWAYS better than one run on sentence. Avri Doria:alerted? Avri Doria:mechanismm to alert ... Tom Barrett - EnCirca: there should be a mechanism to flag and address unanticipated outcomes that impact the community Marika 2:Can you please mute your lines when not speaking Nathalie Peregrine 2:The operator has muted Tom's line as it was causing disturbance Nathalie Peregrine 2:*6 on the phone to unmute Tom Barrett - EnCirca:ok. i muted too Tom Barrett - EnCirca:i think it was me typing Avri Doria:But the flagging still may need work. Marika 2:@Avri - correct. The PDP Manual currently doesn't prescribe how an IRT would flag (e.g. does that need to be a consensus decision, if one member sees an issue it goes to the council, etc.) Marika 2:and what if an SO/AC wants to flag? Marika 2:all questions for the WG to address ;-) Avri Doria:the whole doc will need continuity testing. Alan Greenberg:Very productive meeting! Alan Greenberg:Thanks all Cheryl Langdon-Orr:good progress... thanks. bye Avri Doria:bye bye all