Hello all, The caption notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 SO/AC Accountability Subgroup Meeting #25 – 13 July 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/mrLRAw A copy of the action item and raw caption notes may be found below. Apologies for the delay in sending. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D2FF11.BB0BB800] Action Items: * Rapporteurs will edit the recommendations to reflect the decisions above so this can be considered on the list and at the next meeting. Raw Captioning Notes Please note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call * Word Doc<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64074394/SO-AC%20ACCOUNTABI...> * PDF<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64074394/SO-AC%20ACCOUNTABILITY%20SUBGROUP%20MEETING_07132017-DRAFT-en%5B1%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1500221359000&api=v2> Decisions: * ATRT reviews - The text about ATRT are on p. 7-8 of the report. That's where we would change the recommendation to say that Organizational Reviewer could assess implementation of "Good Practices" We would recommend that this assessment be reflected in the Operattional Standards for the Organizational Reviews (no objections). * No support for any additional accountability to the community by the EC or SOACs * Round Table - Drop the recommendation for an optional round table and return to the original recommendation = we do not recommend a formal MAR, noting that a minority of our group prefers a public gathering of AC/SO leaders (1 objection). * Re IRP to appeal actions or inactions by SOACs.ICANN already give the Ombuds the role to investigating complaints. Actions or inactions. So we would make the recommendation stronger as opposed to saying such as only a bullet. We would clarify it has an appropriate roll to look at action or inaction. I'll just put that into chat. That Ombuds already has a role to action or inaction. I think we should add that the process used by the Ombuds office may be enhanced and or clarified by the work stream two group recommendations reviewing the ombudsman. That's para phrasing a little bit of what Sebastien said. We could not know at this point but we're indicating that role for the Ombuds may be enhanced or clarified by other work stream two process. How does that sound? Requests: * (none)