Dear Maritza, colleagues As I understand, some volunteer’s groups are under the scrutiny of AC/SO to select their own representative. However I haven’t see much CCWG where the participation of an independent member is not allowed, even they may be not consider a member, but observer, they can act as a member as well, may be without some obligation to attend majority of meeting, contribute , answer questions etc., but can express freely their own opinion e suggestion for the work. If this is the case of SSRT2, falling under this category of been not inclusive as demanded by transparency rules of ICANN, then I do agree that ALAC shall consider making this suggestion to review such procedure as a rule for all. To allow ALC to move further, then it is important to pass this motion. If the case, I appreciate the suggestion made by Alex and thank him to alert the group for an open and inclusive ICANN. Best regards, 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: lac-discuss-en <lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of "Maritza Y. Aguero Minano" <myaguero@msn.com> Date: Monday, January 29, 2018 at 01:48 To: LACRALO list <lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [lac-discuss-en] Motion presented by Alejandro Pisanty - "Operating Standards for ICANN Specific Reviews" Dear all, As reported in the monthly LACRALO January call, Alejandro Pisanty has presented the following petition: "ICANN has initiated a public comment on the Guidelines for Reviews on its activities: "Operating Standards for ICANN Specific Reviews": https://www.icann.org/public-comments/reviews-standards-2017-10-17-en MOTION: LACRALO must request the Board and the SO/AC leadership to review the procedures to integrate the "Review Teams". The result of said review should be the inclusion of RT members as a matter of law without requiring the approval of the SO/AC leadership as a whole. RATIONALE: the current system forms a closed system in which it is not possible to include independent opinieons. The process describes how to hire "independent experts" but this refers exclusively to consultants who will be selected in a similar way. The result of this closed cycle were immediate: the "SSRT2" revision or the second DNS security, stability and resiliency review has been put on hold for not achieving progress, which in my opinion is at least partly due to the closed constitution of the working team. STATEMENT OF INTEREST: I have a detailed knowledge of the process as I was Chair of the Initial SSRT (2010) and had submitted a request to participate in the second team as well, and I also have had discussions with the Board, SSAC and ALAC Chairs, as with other members who are part of those bodies. I would be grateful to the Secretariat for attaching a copy of this motion to the documents that will be reviewed this afternoon, as the matter structurally affects the decisions made by the CCWG which led the IANA transition". In this matter, we would like to start a consensus consultation to approve the motion presented by Alejandro Pisanty. This request for consensus will be made available to the Community for a period of three (03) days counted from Monday, January 29th, 2018 and will end on Thursday, February 1st, 2018, due to the time since the request was made and the importance of the subject. In the following link you will find the Motion presented by Alejandro Pisanty: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=79432176 This call for consensus is based on paragraph 12.8 of the LACRALO RoP, which will be considered successful in the absence of significant opposition to it. Regards, Humberto Carrasco -LACRALO Chair Maritza Agüero – LACRALO Secretariat _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en