The next Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 21 July 2015 at 1400 UTC (07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET).
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/o7l74jf
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/ppsai/
Proposed Agenda:
- Roll call/updates to SOI
- Staff overview of preliminary work done to date on review of public comments
- Discussion of WG approach to reviewing public comments – e.g. further categorization of comments; use of sub-teams, etc.
- Next steps
Documents for Review:
PPSAI Public Comment Review Tool v1 Pt 1 - 10 July 2015
PPSAI - Work Plan v10 - 2 July 2015
PPSAI comments spreadsheet from Tucows
MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-14jul15-en.mp3
Meeting Transcript: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-ppsai-14jul15-en.pdf
Attendees:
Frank Michlick – Individual
Val Sherman – IPC
Griffin Barnett – IPC
Kathy Kleiman – NCSG
Darcy Southwell – RrSG
Steve Metalitz - IPC
Alex Deacon –IPC
Stephanie Perrin – NCSG
Phil Corwin – BC
Terri Stumme – BC
Susan Kawaguchi – BC
Chris Pelling – RrSG
Roger Carney – RrSG
James Bladel – RrSG
Sarah Wyld – RrSG
Todd Williams – IPC
Paul McGrady – IPC
Vicky Sheckler – IPC
Lindsay Hamilton-Reid - RrSG
Graeme Bunton – RrSG
Don Blumenthal – RySG
Sara Bockey – RrSG
Keith Kupferschmid – IPC
Amr Elsadr-NCUC
James Gannon – NCUC
Rudi Vansnick – NPOC
David Hughes – IPC
Carlton Samuels – ALAC
Apologies:
Michele Neylon – RrSG
Holly Raiche – ALAC
Susan Prosser – RrSG
ICANN staff:
Mary Wong
Marika Konings
Amy Bivins
Stephen Miller
Terri Agnew
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 14 July 2015
Terri Agnew: Welcome to the PPSAI WG Meeting of 14 July 2015
Chris Pelling:Afternoon all :)
Chris Pelling:Hi Terri and Mary
Terri Agnew:Hi Chris
Chris Pelling:can you zoom in on the document please
Terri Agnew:Sync has been turned on, zoom should work for everyone
Chris Pelling:ta :)
Chris Pelling:I heard that :)
Chris Pelling:the shared document has "vanished" by the way
Mary Wong:@Chris, sorry, I was uploading something else. Which document were you in the midst of reading?
Chris Pelling:just the one that was here, I was busy fiddling to get it on the screen at max res so I dont have to move it around :)
Graeme Bunton:Mary, think you could bring up the workplan to start please?
Graeme Bunton:thx!
Graeme Bunton:brb
Graeme Bunton:back
Bladel:Hi Don!
Don Blumenthal:Hello James
Kathy K:Hi All!
Chris Pelling:HI Don :)
Terri Agnew:Paul McGrady and Vicky Sheckler has joined
Terri Agnew:Susan Kawaguchi has joined audio
Don Blumenthal:Gee,, you'd think I've been gone for awhke, :)
Terri Agnew:Stephanie Perrin has joined
Stephanie Perrin:I agree with what James and Kathy have said.....if we cannot make this deadline, we will just have to miss the deadline. This is an accountability issue folks.
Terri Agnew:James Gannon has joined
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Sorry Im late guys
Terri Agnew:Rudi Vansnick has joined
Rudi Vansnick:sorry for being late, adobe connect issues
Amr Elsadr:Ok. A link to the public comment review tool might be good enough. Thanks.
Rudi Vansnick:please note I'm replacing Marie-Laure Lemineur / NPOC in this WG
Terri Agnew:@Rudi, thank you for this
Don Blumenthal:Welcone to the group, Rudi
Kathy K:+1 James - as it incorporates all comment input
Rudi Vansnick (NPOC):thanks Don
Terri Agnew:David Hughes has joined audio
Kathy K:+1 James G: our timeline was developed around the usual 7-15 comments received...
Amr Elsadr:@James: +1. Review of public comments for other WGs have commonly taken longer than three calls with far fewer comments than the ones submitted here.
Bladel:Agree. And aside from the volume of comments, we should also ackonwledge the media attention.
Bladel:Not sure if Stephanie is responding to my intervention but that's not exactly what I was proposing.
Amr Elsadr:@James: The media attention is a good point. It might not be a bad idea for the leadership team to draft some sort of statement describing how the comments were reviewed/incorporated once we're done. Not sure if this has ever beed done before.
Stephanie Perrin:Actually James, I was more responding to the comments that Steve Metalitz had submitted to the comments period, I think I understand what you were driving at but perhaps you should give it another go....
Vicky Sheckler:i engourage you to read the COA comments as they relate to the petition entries
Bladel:@Amr - Good idea. They should coordinate with the STaff /Communications team.
Mary Wong:@Amr, the co-chairs have agreed to do a blog post about our process, to follow up on David Olive's on the PDP from last week
Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Great. :)
Carlton Samuels:Howdy all
Carlton Samuels:Had a time getting here
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Im not sure about subgroups analysing comments, comment analysis is usually done in the whole
Stephanie Perrin:Glad you made it Carlton, I have to leave in a minute so you can have my proxy (joke)
Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: More input is a great success +1
Carlton Samuels:@Steph I am so honoured :-)
Marika Konings:@James - in the CWG the sub-team / design team approach worked pretty well to aid with the review of comments
Chris Pelling:I totally agree with James G
Marika Konings:CWG-Stewardship I should say ;-)
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Mariks yes but the DT's where about the size of this whole WG in many cases
Marika Konings:mmm, I don't think that is true...most of the DT only consisted of 3-4 active members.
Marika Konings:and in any case, anything would always come back to the full group for review
Lindsay Hamilton-Reid:I have to leave now, apologies
Amr Elsadr:I'm guessing that using sub-teams will actually take longer. Sub-team review of comments will have to be reviewed a second time by the rest of the WG members. If enough questions and changes to the initial review are asked/made, it might be quicker for the whole group to just go through them once.
Terri Agnew:goodbye Lindsay
Marika Konings:@Amr - from experience, most discussion typically relates to WG action that is recommended based on the comments received, not necessarily formulating responses to comments that may not require further action.
Kathy K:Tx for all of this work, Mary!
Marika Konings:the formulatiing of responses is also something that can be done online (e.g. creation of a wiki page or google document that can be used for collaboration and formulation of responses)
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Marika, Im not vehementaly against it, but I'd have to see the mechanisms by how we would approach it in detial to ensure that we dont lose anything in the process
Stephanie Perrin:Yes indeed, thanks to everyone who has been toiling away on this, a tremendous amount of work.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Yes staff are doing fantastic!
Stephanie Perrin:Sorry have to run! Will check the audio.
Marika Konings:@James - yes, agreed. Just putting out some ideas on how the group can manage it effectively in efficiently without necessarily having to go through each line of text on a call with everyone on.
Marika Konings:and yes, Mary's work should hopefully assist with that :-)
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:=) We woud be lucky to finish by 2117 if we did that =)
Kathy K:@Marika: do you have a wiki example of what you are referencing - it would be great to see how wikis have been used
Marika Konings:Exactly! :-)
Marika Konings:let me check - I think some of the CWG-Stewardship DTs used google docs, but there may also have been wiki pages.
Kathy K:Great, tx
Kathy K:!
Bladel:Thanks to Graeme & the folks at Tucows for putting this together.
Alex Deacon:This is very helpful Graene - thanks for putting this togehter.
Mary Wong:Sorry it's taking so long to upload - it's a huge spreadsheet; you should all have it in email.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:Not machine generated, lets be careful about or classification of those comments guys.
Philip Corwin:I'm not seeing Graeme's spreadsheet -- will it be distributed?
steve metalitz:@Phil it was sent to list last night.
Philip Corwin:OK, will search mail for it
Amr Elsadr:Good catch Kathy.
steve metalitz:@Kathy, good point, but filtering for attachments should help avoid that problem.
Philip Corwin:Found the doc. Thanks Graeme
Marika Konings:@Kathy - here is a CWG-Stewardship example: https://community.icann.org/x/2RwnAw. Staff identified which comments were relevant to DT O (IANA Budget), the design team then collaborated via email and teleconference to identify draft responses to the comments and recommended to the CWG which action should be taken based on the comments received in the final proposal. The CWG would then either adopt the proposed approach or discuss any items it did not agree with or had questions about.
Mary Wong:The idea is still that people will look through the whole spreadsheet and flag comemnts that should be addressed by the WG rather than "collapsed"
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:12000 rows of goodness =)
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:I think we broke adobe
Mary Wong::)
Kathy K:@Marika: interesting. Definitely a great model!
Vicky Sheckler:+1 to metalitz' suggestion
Carlton Samuels:I can't hear Steve at all!
Graeme Bunton:He's loud and clear to me, Carlton
Chris Pelling:Graeme, SteveM is quite quiet oover here too iun the UK
Chris Pelling:yes I would prefer extending the call
Todd Williams:Steve's approach makes sense. Can we divide into those three groups on the email list and then go from there?
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:We need to discuss the process before we go any further on the subteams approach
Vicky Sheckler:agree with Todd
Carlton Samuels:I prefer furhter categorisation then we should take the committee of the whole approach; means we might have to extend the calls
Philip Corwin:I would prefer longer calls as opposed to additional calls.
Bladel:Need to drop. Sorry.
Don Blumenthal:I think that we need to post alterbatives to then ertire group before moving forward.
Carlton Samuels:It will require some tight call management but we have good managers
Darcy Southwell:I would prefer longer calls rather than more calls, too.
Sara Bockey:need to drop. sorry
Chris Pelling:Many thanks to all :) have a great week ahead and will see the comments in the emails :)
Marika Konings:You could consider doing a test case for one specific category?
Marika Konings:and see whether it works
Chris Pelling:Thanks Graeme
Kathy K:Tx for the call today, Graeme and All!
Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.
James Gannon [GNSO-NCSG]:That might be a good ap[proach marika take a smple one and try it
Carlton Samuels:Bye all
Rudi Vansnick (NPOC):thanks, bye all
Carlton Samuels:Thanks Graeme have a good time
Darcy Southwell:Thanks all!
