- Ws2-guidelines - lists.icann.org

October 19 Meeting Agenda and Most Recent Draft
by Lori Schulman Oct. 19, 2016

Oct. 19, 2016

Dear All, Attached is the agenda for tomorrow’s call, the draft guidelines with questions that will be posted to Google Docs by the time of the meeting or soon thereafter and the question to the Legal Sub team regarding the potential conflict of interest regarding ICANN in-house legal review of the guidelines. I expect our call will be short tomorrow. I do hope that we have a good turn out and I will update you on the Hyderabad meeting our preparation for it. Please let me know if you have questions or comments. Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman

2 1

[Ws2-staff_acct] Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Subgroup Meeting #3_ 05 October 2016
by Yvette Guigneaux Oct. 5, 2016

Oct. 5, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Subgroup, Meeting #3 - 05 October 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/dQW4Aw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. Kindest Regards, Yvette Guigneaux Multi-Stakeholder & Strategic Initiative Assistant ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers 12025 Waterfront Drive, Playa Vista, CA 90094 yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org<mailto:yvette.guigneaux@icann.org> | www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> ________________________________ Notes 1. Rapporteur's report to the plenary planning group dated October 2 - Review and discussion of Report to plenary on activities of the subgroup 2. First draft of guidelines proposed by the Rapporteur to the list on October 2 - Discussion of what the subgroup needs for drafting support from Staff Looking at drafters to look at WS1 and identify applicable items for consideration for the draft report. -Discussion of the report outline and rough draft of what the group might focus its work on in collecting inputs from the group. -Draft contains min. set of guidelines - seeking feedback on draft guidelines. Need to capture questions that need to be addressed in the draft as well as to capture comments. Question raised - should the committee draft what it means to have a reasonable timeframe for an investigation. Might have the Ombudsman be apart of the process to observe to make sure things are fair and the process is followed for removal. Comment from Herb - feels that there is a role for the Ombudsman in this process. Procedures for Board removal is contained in the Bylaws under Article 3 - Removal of Directors 1-8 are subject to a Nominating Committee Director Removal Petition to the EC Administration. One of the requirements is that the petition include "supporting rational in reasonable detail." See Annex D, Art. 3, Section 3.1, (D).1.(i), (page 178), SO/AC Board Members are subject to a different procedure. The Petition to remove an SO/AC appointee is made directly to the SO/AC. The SO/AC may accept or reject the petition based on its own internal procedures. Might consider in drafting the report to add examples and what the group was thinking when they drafted a guideline or section of the report. Focus is on how to remove a Board member not on the causes for Board member removal. Herb to consider reviewing draft report for fairness will not draft text for the report as its the community that should decide what it wants. ACTION ITEM; Will set up Google doc for the group for submitting comments on draft. 3. Requirement for legal assistance - Discussion of when to go for external advice and the materials that may need legal review Aware of needs to keep an eye on budget issues when asking for legal review. Will consider going to ICANN Legal first as their expertise is ICANN, but may need additional support and opinion from outside counsel as it relates to an ICANN Board member. Will follow CCWG procedures in requesting legal advice. Concerned raise on potential conflict of interest if just relying on ICANN advice on guidelines. Considering raising the question to the CCWG Legal Subcommittee for consideration of the question. ACTION ITEM: Rapporteur to ask the CCWG Legal Committee on legal conflict with ICANN legal providing opinion of guidelines 4. Requirements for drafting assistance from staff

1 0

FW: CCWG-Sub-groups Action Items from last plenary
by Lori Schulman Oct. 2, 2016

Oct. 2, 2016

Dear All, Below and attached are a proposed agenda for this week’s call and the report that I submitted to the WS2 Subgroup leadership this afternoon. Please review the report. If there are any revisions, we can discuss at our next meeting and I will make them in future reports. The report reflects my understanding of where we are based on our last 2 conversations. Based on the feedback in the chat from the last meeting, my recommendation is that we begin to draft the actual guidelines and then compare them to the NTIA criteria and the WS1 report afterward. I would like to use next Wednesday’s call as a session to gather ideas and come out with a rough draft. We can start with bullet points and add explanations as we go. My suggestions would be to have guidelines that cover all Board members and then a subset for SO/AC appointees if we feel that is necessary. Given our “minimalist” approach, I think it would be a good idea for SO/AC’s to have a requirement to transmit their expectations to their appointees otherwise, the Board Member will not have sufficient notice of what the expectations are. We don’t dictate the expectation but require that whatever the expectation is that it be disclosed. Otherwise, the Board Members may assert that they did not have notice of the expectations or, otherwise, have some sort of conflict that having knowledge of the expectation could have resolved. My suggestions are below (and attached) and I welcome input, revisions, etc. As a reminder, under Article 3 of the Bylaws – Removal of Directors 1-8 are subject to a Nominating Committee Director Removal Petition to the EC Administration. One of the requirements is that the petition include “supporting rational in reasonable detail.” See Annex D, Art. 3, Section 3.1, (D).1.(i), (page 178), SO/AC Board Members are subject to a different procedure. The Petition to remove an SO/AC appointee is made directly to the SO/AC. The SO/AC may accept or reject the petition based on its own internal procedures. Proposed guidelines for bringing proposed board removal actions: 1) For All Board seats, petitions for removal: a. may be for any cause b. should: i. be fact based ii. in sufficient detail to verify facts iii. supply supporting evidence if available iv. include references to applicable by-laws and/or procedures if the assertion is that a specific by-law or procedure has been breached v. be respectful and professional in tone 2) In addition, for SO/AC nominees, each SO/AC should: a. establish expectations for Board member effectiveness with regard to representing SO/AC interests b. transmit the expectations to the Board Members within a specified period of time upon taking a seat on the board c. clarify that SO/AC expectations are in addition to any cause that may be brought forth without limiting cause d. develop procedures for consideration of SO/AC Director Removal Petition Notices that include: i. reasonable time frames for investigation ii. written verification of claims iii. consistent voting method for accepting or rejecting a petition I am offline for the next 48 hours and I do look forward to more feedback and productive discussions. Thank you for your good work. Lori Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman From: Lori Schulman Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2016 2:15 PM To: 'Niels ten Oever' <lists(a)nielstenoever.net>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard(a)gmail.com>; Thomas Rickert <thomas(a)rickert.net>; Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx>; ACCT-Staff (acct-staff(a)icann.org) <acct-staff(a)icann.org>; Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com>; fasonga(a)kixp.or.ke; Nigel Roberts <nigel(a)channelisles.net>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com>; Vinay Kesari <vinay.kesari(a)gmail.com>; Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien(a)bachollet.com>; Edward Morris <egmorris1(a)toast.net>; Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr(a)gmail.com>; farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii(a)gmail.com>; stevedelbianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org>; avri doria <avri(a)apc.org>; Jordan Carter <jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz>; Wilson, Christopher <cwilson(a)21cf.com>; Michael Karanicolas <michael(a)law-democracy.org> Subject: RE: CCWG-Sub-groups Action Items from last plenary Dear All, Due to the religious observance, I will not be attending the meetings on October 2 or October 3. However, I would like to report that our Subgroup has had 2 calls and we have made progress toward establishing a framework for Guidelines of Standards of Conduct Presumed to be in Good Faith with Exercising Removal of ICANN Board Member. We have determined that we will propose a “minimalist” set of guidelines that will put the responsibility of putting specific processes in place by each SO/AC. This is because we do not wish to interfere in the decision making process of any particular SO/AC. The SO/ACs may have different expectations and standards for Board Members who are chosen to represent them. The guidelines will note each SO/AC has (or should have) a decision making process and the process must include a means to document the decision made, including verification and the steps taken to reach the decision. Our thought is not to be too prescriptive but establish principles for fair and reasonable conduct for the community even if different internal standards apply for different interests. Per the guidance from the WS1 discussions, we will not be listing specific causes of action. Each SO/AC could have a different standard for what constitutes a cause of action for board removal but all SO/ACs must follow the same guidelines in order to elevate their concerns to an action for removal in good faith. The proposed action may be subjective but should be able to be explained and accepted by others. The subgroup has determined that this topic should be categorized as “less complex” and should be able to turn a final or near final report by January 2017. Having a preliminary report by October 5 is not realistic as that is 3 days away but we will work with staff to coordinate a reasonable timeline and to have as complete a set of information as is reasonable for the Hyderabad meeting. Our next step is to begin drafting the actual guidelines and then compare them to the NTIA criteria and WS1 proposal and by-laws. I will note that our sub group is small and many members are involved in other subgroups so helping hands may be full. As the rapporteur, I understand that my responsibility is to ensure the proper drafting of the proposal and will assume most of the drafting work. I will seek assistance from staff as I believe that we will need it. I will reach out to Karen Mulberry to establish a realistic time table and how to coordinate with the staff given all of their other responsibilities. With regard to legal assistance, we have not discussed this issue yet. However, I do not anticipate the need for heavy assistance. It would be prudent once the guidelines are complete to have a review by a legal expert with substantial experience in California nonprofit governance to ensure that there are no red flags. Diligence requires process and as long as we have a clear and documented process, we should be able to meet a “good faith” standard. However, given the quirks of CA law, I would not want to assume anything. I would anticipate maybe 8-10 hours of very experienced, independent attorney time and will confirm this with my subgroup. Lori Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman From: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net] Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2016 3:44 AM To: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard(a)gmail.com<mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com>>; Thomas Rickert <thomas(a)rickert.net<mailto:thomas@rickert.net>>; Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>; ACCT-Staff (acct-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>) <acct-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>>; Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>>; fasonga(a)kixp.or.ke<mailto:fasonga@kixp.or.ke>; Lori Schulman <lschulman(a)inta.org<mailto:lschulman@inta.org>>; Nigel Roberts <nigel(a)channelisles.net<mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>>; Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; Vinay Kesari <vinay.kesari(a)gmail.com<mailto:vinay.kesari@gmail.com>>; Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien(a)bachollet.com<mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com>>; Edward Morris <egmorris1(a)toast.net<mailto:egmorris1@toast.net>>; Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>>; farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii(a)gmail.com<mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>>; stevedelbianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org>>; avri doria <avri(a)apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>>; Jordan Carter <jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>>; Wilson, Christopher <cwilson(a)21cf.com<mailto:cwilson@21cf.com>>; Michael Karanicolas <michael(a)law-democracy.org<mailto:michael@law-democracy.org>> Subject: Re: CCWG-Sub-groups Action Items from last plenary Hi Bernard, Thanks for the reminder, could you please be so kind to resend the template for the subgroup papers? Thanks in advance, Niels On 09/30/2016 08:46 PM, Bernard Turcotte wrote: > All rapporteurs for CCWG sub-groups, > > At our last plenary meeting the following action items were recorded: > > > CCWG Accountability Plenary WS2 Meeting #5 - 20 September 2016____ > > ACTION ITEMS:____ > > 1. Sub-group rapporteurs should advise in the next two weeks if they are > a complex topic or not for purposes of scheduling as presented today. > Rapporteurs to deliver their subgroups paper 3 weeks (October 5^th ) > prior to Hyderabad outlining work.____ > > 2. Staff to review resources to see if there is a means to do interviews > with leaders to assist in drafting positions. Sub-groups to advise staff > if interested in this assistance.____ > > > > So this is just a gentle reminder as we will be having a prep meeting at > 0500UTC Monday 3 October and a plenary the next day at the same time to > be prepared to discuss the above items. > > Staff have not received any requests from sub-groups for assistance in > drafting papers as proposed by Thomas at our last meeting. If you do > request assistance please email us ASAP. > > Have a good weekend. > > B. > > -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org<http://www.article19.org> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 ________________________________

1 0

[CCWG-ACCT] Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Subgroup_ Meeting #2_ 28 September 16
by MSSI Secretariat Sept. 28, 2016

Sept. 28, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith, Meeting #2 - 28 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62390529 A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. Kindest Regards, Yvette Guigneaux Multi-Stakeholder & Strategic Initiative Assistant ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers 12025 Waterfront Drive, Playa Vista, CA 90094 yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org<mailto:yvette.guigneaux@icann.org> | www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> ________________________________ Notes Rapporteur: Lori Schulman 1. Administration Overview of the working methods and use of WS1 recommendations and NTIA criteria to assist in determining standards and recommendations from the group. 2. Brainstorming for Guidelines for Standard of Conduct a. How are members removed now? Has anyone ever been removed? Discussion - has anyone every been removed and is the Board the only entity that can remove a member. Up until now only the Board has the right to remove members but they have never removed anyone under the new process the community can also remove members. Do not want to create a cumbersome process and want to keep inline with duties prescribed in the law for Board members and the basic standard may not be enough for ICANN as they may need to be held to a higher standard. It was noted that the Board has incorporated some guidance on how it would consider removal of Board members, such as within the Board Code of Conduct and the Guidelines for that Code of Conduct Each SO/ACs will set own processes to address the process that they will undertake. Trying to put some words around what it means to do something in good faith. Might be a broad standard that applies to the entire community and that people must verify the facts. Is there a standard that applies to the entire community? or does the action come up from the SO/ACs and the process that they set. It was noted from the chat - think we need a degree of expectations not wide variance in the AC/SO processes though Alan thus 'Guidelines' and : sited expectations of the AC or SO for their Members conduct and role not being met' should be OK to action and "without cause per se Need to set up expectation guidelines for SO/ACs to look through as part of their own processes. Might be worth while to establish some guideline principles for fare and reasonable conduct. Should note that SO/AC should note decisions made by formal processes, including the rational for the decision as well as to appoint the formal spokespersons for the group. Note that this could mean that each SO/AC must have a formal process to bring a claim forward, rules of procedure by which they will make decisions to take a formal action. Every SO/AC has a decision making process. and the process needs to include a means to document the decision made and the steps taken to reach the decision. The process should be aligned with the process used to select the groups board member should be similar to the one use to take action to remove a Board member. There may be some exceptions to the applying such a principle, Noncom was used as a example. Should not be too prescriptive in the process. Note - the charged always has a right of response and has the right to end the process by resigning (are we sure there was never any thought of Board on Board removal - or just none ever got all the way ) The Board would still retain the ability to remove a director if convicted of a crime b. What good practices are we trying to promote when making a claim? Discussion: AOB ACTION ITEM Lori will send to the list a summary of the items discussed and possible approaches that could be undertaken.

1 0

Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct Subgroup Meeting #1 - 21 Sept
by MSSI Secretariat Sept. 28, 2016

Sept. 28, 2016

Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct Subgroup Meeting #1 - 21 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/-wC4Aw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes 1. Introduction of Rapporteur 2. Introduction of Team 3. Explaining the Task 4. Expectations for Deliverables Executive Summary Description of Issue * Current State of Play * Supplemental Report Recommendations * Requirements for recommendation (no wordsmithing expected) * Rationale for recommendation Assessment of Recommendations * How do the recommendations meet the NTIA criteria? * Are the recommendations compliant with WS1 recommendations? 5. Special Concerns of the Group 6. Establishing a Work Plan 7. Regular Calls * Administrative Items - SOI, attendance * Introduction and background of team members present to kick off the subgroup meeting * Discussion of the work plan and scoping of the topic to be discussed in the group. * Task is about standards behavior for community. * Deliverables - review of work and preparing the report to be provided to the CCWG Plenary * Special Concerns - is topic to be scheduled as shorter less complex or more complex. Potentially target to have draft of the work done by Jan 2017. Anticipate having initial draft of the work completed by Hyderabad. * Ask that the group members look at drafting proposals for what should be in guidelines, exchange thoughts on process on the list and then the pints can be pulled together into the rough draft of the report. * Will start with the description of the Issue, include proposals exchanged on the list. Options for proceeding will be proposed to the list so that those who were not participating in the discussion could weigh in on approach the work will take on conducting its assessment of its recommendations and how these should be considered by the group.

1 0

Agenda for Guidelines for Standard of Conduct and a Query to the Group
by Lori Schulman Sept. 28, 2016

Sept. 28, 2016

Attached is the agenda for today's call. I took the liberty of writing down some ideas about how to categorize the discussion with some specific questions we can address. Also, I am interested in knowing whether the group thinks it would be more helpful to: a) Make suggestions for our guidelines and simultaneously assess which meet the NTIA criteria and are compliant with WS1 recommendations or b) Make suggestions for our guidelines, come up with our plan and then do the assessment more toward the end of the exercise I tend to favor option b) but think there is merit in a) because our report would basically be complete when done even though the initial process would be slower and little less free flowing. Please share your thoughts on this list and on the call. Lori Lori Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association 1250 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 200 Washington DC, USA +1-202-704-0408, skype: lsschulman www.inta.org<http://www.inta.org/> Find us on: [Description: Description: Description: cid:F361C18F-02FE-4CF0-A43E-AA8566DC2514] Twitter<https://twitter.com/INTA> [Description: Description: LinkedIn] LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/groupInvitation?groupID=69899> [Description: Description: facebook-logo (2)] Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/GoINTA?ref=ts> [Description: Description: pnpb_sig.png]

1 0

WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Agenda 09_21_2017
by Lori Schulman Sept. 21, 2016

Sept. 21, 2016

Dear All, Attached is the agenda for this afternoon's call. I look forward to beginning our discussions. Lori

1 0

FW: Welcome to SubGroup - Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct - Redo
by Lori Schulman Sept. 12, 2016

Sept. 12, 2016

Dear All, I am resending my message from last week with a request that the participants in this group send me your preferred days and times for meetings in a private email to lschulman(a)inta.org<mailto:lschulman@inta.org>. Apparently, my Doodle poll got lost in the either. Our open slots are 5 UTC, 13 UTC and 19 UTC during the week. This corresponds to 1 am, 9 am and 3 pm EDT. I will schedule calls based on that information. Also, please respond to this list that you received this message so that I know that communications are going through. Thank you. Lori Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman From: Lori Schulman Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 1:01 PM To: 'ws2-guidelines(a)ICANN.org' <ws2-guidelines(a)ICANN.org> Subject: Welcome to SubGroup - Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct Dear All, Welcome to our subgroup. I am excited to be working with all of you as we head into the next phase of accountability reforms. I am the volunteer rapporteur and will coordinate our deliverable through to completion. The first order of business is to schedule our calls through to the Hyderabad meeting and you should have received the link to the Doodle Poll via the list. We have open time slots of 5 UTC, 13 UTC and 19 UTC for our calls. My thought is to schedule an initial call and then do most of the work over the list with follow up calls every 2 weeks rather than once a week. As we are geographically diverse, this should lessen the pain. I will also rotate the times. These times correspond to Eastern Daylight time 1 am, 9 am and 3 pm. Please send me your preferred times and days via the Doodle. For future reference: Our subgroup wiki is located at: https://community.icann.org/display/WEIA/Guidelines+for+Good+Faith+Conduct I have also attached the outline for our subgroup deliverable and the slide presentation that the rapporteurs received in our kickoff call last week. It explains our mission very clearly. Our second order of business will be to establish a time and work plan for producing our deliverable which I hope will be achieved on our first call. Lori Lori Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association 1250 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 200 Washington DC, USA +1-202-704-0408, skype: lsschulman www.inta.org<http://www.inta.org/> Find us on: [Description: Description: Description: cid:F361C18F-02FE-4CF0-A43E-AA8566DC2514] Twitter<https://twitter.com/INTA> [Description: Description: LinkedIn] LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/groupInvitation?groupID=69899> [Description: Description: facebook-logo (2)] Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/GoINTA?ref=ts> [Description: Description: pnpb_sig.png]

4 4

Welcome to SubGroup - Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct
by Lori Schulman Aug. 8, 2016

Aug. 8, 2016

Dear All, Welcome to our subgroup. I am excited to be working with all of you as we head into the next phase of accountability reforms. I am the volunteer rapporteur and will coordinate our deliverable through to completion. The first order of business is to schedule our calls through to the Hyderabad meeting and you should have received the link to the Doodle Poll via the list. We have open time slots of 5 UTC, 13 UTC and 19 UTC for our calls. My thought is to schedule an initial call and then do most of the work over the list with follow up calls every 2 weeks rather than once a week. As we are geographically diverse, this should lessen the pain. I will also rotate the times. These times correspond to Eastern Daylight time 1 am, 9 am and 3 pm. Please send me your preferred times and days via the Doodle. For future reference: Our subgroup wiki is located at: https://community.icann.org/display/WEIA/Guidelines+for+Good+Faith+Conduct I have also attached the outline for our subgroup deliverable and the slide presentation that the rapporteurs received in our kickoff call last week. It explains our mission very clearly. Our second order of business will be to establish a time and work plan for producing our deliverable which I hope will be achieved on our first call. Lori Lori Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association 1250 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 200 Washington DC, USA +1-202-704-0408, skype: lsschulman www.inta.org<http://www.inta.org/> Find us on: [Description: Description: Description: cid:F361C18F-02FE-4CF0-A43E-AA8566DC2514] Twitter<https://twitter.com/INTA> [Description: Description: LinkedIn] LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/groupInvitation?groupID=69899> [Description: Description: facebook-logo (2)] Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/GoINTA?ref=ts> [Description: Description: pnpb_sig.png]

2 1

Welcome! WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct Subgroup
by MSSI Secretariat July 12, 2016

July 12, 2016

Dear WS2 Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct Subgroup, Welcome to CCWG Accountability Work Stream 2 - Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct in Participation in Board Removal Discussion Subgroup. Thank you for volunteering to be part of this team. You will find the Guidelines for Good Faith Conduct Wiki page here<https://community.icann.org/x/nhWOAw> where the list of participants and observers can be found. Documents and meeting archives will also be posted here as available. This subteam list email address is: ws2-guidelines(a)icann.org<mailto:ws2-guidelines@icann.org> and is now open. If you have any admin inquiries, please direct them to acct-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

1 0