The new Cross-Community Working Group will begin meeting in May 2014.
The CWG Group Drafting Team began meeting in February 2014.
The DT developed a proposed Charter for a new CWG to take forward the initial work of the GNSO's CWG Drafting Team (see below), supplemented by feedback received from the ccNSO in 2013. See the Charter and other background documents for further information on the DT's work.
Meetings of the initial (2011-2012) GNSO Cross-Community Working Group Drafting Team (with transcripts and MP3 recordings) are listed below.
20 December 2011: UTC/1200 PST/1500 EST/2000 London/2100 CET: Transcript and MP3
For Review: 20 December -- Revised Draft Principles for GNSO Council Review (without rational) and Revised Draft Principles with Rationale; Revised Draft Principles with Edits from the List 19 Dec 2011; Revised Draft Principles 13 Dec 2011
13 December 2011: UTC/1200 PST/1500 EST/2000 London/2100 CET: Transcript and MP3
For Review: Revised Draft Principles 12 Dec 2011; Draft Principles for CWGs Edits 22 Nov.pdf
22 November 2011: 2000 UTC/1200 PST/1500 EST/2000 London/2100 CET: Transcript and MP3
Attendees: Jonathan Robinson (Chair), Chuck Gomes Alan Greenberg, Mikey O’Conner, Wendy Seltzer, Jaime Wagner; Staff: Julie Hedlund, Liz Gasster, and Nathalie Peregrine
General Comments:
- Accept changes suggested by John and Chuck unless otherwise noted
- Add outline numbering throughout (as reference below)
- Note that since rationale will be included in the final document (not only for WG use) then the language should be made parallel and details added.
- Consider whether to use “should” or “must” (suggestion in chat room by Wendy)
1. Scope of CWGs:
a) Change “Limit purpose to” to “Purpose”
i) Delete “and/or to ICANN staff”
2. Operations of CWGs:
a) Formation of CWGs:
ii) Consider adding “whenever possible” and bracket for further discussion. Could include a situation where you had a ccNSO/GNSO WG where you had some issues of common interest and others that were not, or where a separate set of rules might apply. There could be issues where there might be a separate set of rules. However, others asked why more than one set of rules might apply. Marked for discussion on the next call. Also, add language suggested by Mikey that indicates that the charter defines the rules and procedures for the CWG.
b) Execution of CWGs:
i) Why “as appropriate”? Suggested revision: “CWGs should follow the approved charter and bring concerns back to all chartering organizations for resolution according to their respective processes.”
c) Outcomes of CWGs
i) Suggested revision: “Policy recommendations should be considered for possible approval and approved through the appropriate Policy Development Process.”
ii) Suggested revision: Delete “only” and “further” and change to “must communicate”.
iii) Add new iii based on comments in the chat and Wendy’s follow up email on the list.
10 November 2011: Transcript and MP3
Attached please find a revised Principles “chart” for our next call, which will be finalized shortly for 22 November (time TBD). Those who were able to participate at the last meeting may recall that we decided to reformat the draft principles for CWGs into a chart form that would include a column for “rationale”. I took the liberty of providing some draft ideas for rationale that might expedite the drafting of these points. Please feel free to toss these and provide your own – just intended to be helpful.
On last week’s call, the DT also asked the GNSO Secretariat to reach out to several people who had previously expressed an interest in joining the group, and several names have been added to the DT list as a result. We are setting up a wiki page for this group which will be made available later this week. Participant information will be updated on that page.
The group further confirmed its intent at the appropriate time to seek support from the GNSO Council to solicit the participation of other SOs and ACs to collaborate on these draft principles once this group agreed the draft was ready to be shared with those key stakeholders. This could be done by circulating a preliminary set of principles for input subject to final GNSO comment, or by inviting SO and AC representatives to join a drafting team for that purpose. The DT may wish to confirm these steps at an upcoming meeting.
Please review the attached, noting that the draft language under “Rationale” are my personal thoughts at this time and nothing more. All edits appreciated.
27 October 2011: Agenda, Presentation, and Audiocast
Key meeting points:
1. Presentations and Initial discussion: The initial discussion focused around key themes emphasized by the first speakers, including: the need for clearly defined scope; the importance of understanding the perspectives (and processes) of each SO and AC and the need to recognize unique aspects of each SO and AC; and the desire to strike an appropriate balance between simplicity and allowing the flexibility to accommodate varying processes of SOs and ACs while retaining enough structure and rules to ensure confidence and predictability in how these groups conduct their work.
2. Discussion of next steps: The group agreed with a suggestion made by Chuck Gomes to seek GNSO Council concurrence to reach out in short order to other SOs and ACs to work collaboratively on the principles and rules applicable to CWGs as a way to accelerate progress by this group.
3. The group began reviewing and editing the draft principles that have previously been circulated (see slides pp. 8-9 here: http://dakar42.icann.org/meetings/dakar2011/presentation-ccwg-27oct11-en.pdf ). Due to time limitations, the group did not complete this discussion – redline edits are included in the attached (reformatted as a Word document) so that you can follow the discussion – we only began to discuss the first “practice”. This can be continued on our upcoming call – please look for the “doodle” which will be sent shortly to find a time for the group to meet next week.
