Page History

...

And then the next action item is the staff to set up the Skype and mailing list for the new ALAC and At Large members and it seems to have all been done.  So these are the action items.  Any comments on the action items from anyone?  No comment.  Okay. 

Wiki MarkupWe’ll then have to move on to the next thing if I can find my window again.    Items for discussion and the first item for discussion -- – we have two main items for discussion.    The first one is the next steps on the 2011-2014 Strategic Planning Developments; and the second one will be the next steps on the \ [ADAT\] Working Group, whatever that will mean.    And I guess that Evan will be able to tell us about this.    But the most important item for the day today is the next steps on the 2011-2014 Strategic Planning Developments. \\ 

We have three links on our meeting page which are the one, first link on the public comment on Strategic Plan; the second one being the ICANN Strategic Planning Development Community Workspace which has been very kindly set up recently, as recently as, was it yesterday or the day before; and the third one being the ALAC Statement on the Draft 2010-2014 Strategic Plan, v. 0.01, which was put up last night. 

...

Olivier Crepin-Leblond:          This question has been asked earlier and there was a question I think it was to Matthias, whether we had the transcriptions from these calls. 

Wiki MarkupMatthias Langenegger:            Yes, I received the email and I forwarded it to \[Gisla\] who is dealing with the transcriptions.  I think she’s not on the call at the moment.  I am expecting an answer from her on this question. \\Langenegger:            Yes, I received the email and I forwarded it to [Gisla] who is dealing with the transcriptions.  I think she’s not on the call at the moment.  I am expecting an answer from her on this question. 

Olivier Crepin-Leblond:          The alternative is to listen to these calls.  Sorry, Cheryl, you were about to say?

...

Tijani Ben Jemaa:                    Okay. 

Wiki MarkupOlivier Crepin-Leblond:                    Okay, right.    I think we’ve got a plan on this now and I can always follow up with each one of you afterwards if there is a requirement to do so on Skype and using emails.    We do have hard stops for some of the members here and I think that we should therefore move on to the next part.    We’re already fifteen minutes late in this call and the next part is Evan to speak to us about the \ [ADAT\] Group.    Evan?\\

Wiki MarkupEvan Leibovitch:                     Hi there.  Okay, \[ADAT\] is basically just meant as a pronounceable acronym, but the intention here, \[ADAT\] stands for Applicant Guidebook Alternative Text.  And the intention is to respond to the Board comments from Cartegena and to the GAC comments from Cartegena saying that they want to have some revisions to the Applicant Guidebook. \\Leibovitch:                     Hi there.  Okay, [ADAT] is basically just meant as a pronounceable acronym, but the intention here, [ADAT] stands for Applicant Guidebook Alternative Text.  And the intention is to respond to the Board comments from Cartegena and to the GAC comments from Cartegena saying that they want to have some revisions to the Applicant Guidebook. 

Right now it seems like everybody’s saying, “Okay, we need to fix something,” but nobody’s being very specific at all about what they want.  The Rec 6 Group has made some incredible progress, but appears to be almost – I won’t say at an impasse – but it almost seems like it’s exhausted its mandate in that it’s gone as far as it can in terms of coming up with some high-level areas of consensus, but a complete inability to translate that into, “Okay, what is the actual wording changes?”  There’s also some ambiguity in the nature of the consensus such as we found.  Things like the Dispute Resolution Service Provider concept, something with which At Large strongly disagreed. 

Staff was able to interpret the consensus points of the combined working group as to say, “Okay, you still want the DRSP.”  And so on one hand the consensus for this reach has been very laudable; on the other hand, the plausible ways to interpret it have gone in an number of different directions and I believe both the Board and also the GAC are trying to figure ways of how to take what they want or what they’d like to see resolved and express that in a way that they can work with.

                                                So the intention behind putting this \[ADAT\] Team together was to actually try and craft some actual alternative wording to the Applicant Guidebook.  Not talking high-level issues; not talking generalities or philosophies, but essentially get down to the nitty-gritty and say, “Okay, here are the mechanics of how we see things should be working.” \\

                                                So the intention behind putting this [ADAT] Team together was to actually try and craft some actual alternative wording to the Applicant Guidebook.  Not talking high-level issues; not talking generalities or philosophies, but essentially get down to the nitty-gritty and say, “Okay, here are the mechanics of how we see things should be working.” 

The intention is to – there were some jokes when I mentioned this to a couple of people on emails – the intention was to try and make the Board’s life easier in saying, “Okay, here is a The intention is to – there were some jokes when I mentioned this to a couple of people on emails – the intention was to try and make the Board’s life easier in saying, “Okay, here is a potential drop-in replacement,” rather than a philosophical discussion.  And I guess the idea being that nothing like this would actually make their lives easier; I don’t think that’s possible.  But at the same time, the intention is to cut right to the chase, not deal with the high-level issues – take the high-level issues that a chief consensus within the combined working groups and then put them into specific wording in a manner consistent with what At Large, and I believe other members of the community have been advocating.
I guess the idea being that nothing like this would actually make their lives easier; I don’t think that’s possible.  But at the same time, the intention is to cut right to the chase, not deal with the high-level issues – take the high-level issues that a chief consensus within the combined working groups and then put them into specific wording in a manner consistent with what At Large, and I believe other members of the community have been advocating.

                                                So the intention right now with [ADAT] is to also make this cross-community, but a little bit less so than the existing combined working group.  The combined working group right now has basically failed to achieve consensus on a number of the components that are required to be able to take this from high-level philosophy to actual wording of the AG.  Wiki Markup                                                So the intention right now with \[ADAT\] is to also make this cross-community, but a little bit less so than the existing combined working group.  The combined working group right now has basically failed to achieve consensus on a number of the components that are required to be able to take this from high-level philosophy to actual wording of the AG. \\

So essentially what we want to try and do is get the At Large together with, I would say, friendly members, OGNSO, hopefully a couple of people from the GAC at very least as observers, to try and literally do the penmanship of taking what we’ve been advocating all along saying, “Okay, this is how we would change the Guidebook.” 

...

Evan Leibovitch:                     Okay, I can go on specific conversations that I have seen on mailing lists since Cartegena.  For instance, specifically on issues of the independent objectors.  I’ve already seen… But that’s not the only issue; there are other issues such as what is the role of the experts.  I thought that the Rec 6 group was very, very specific in what it was saying about what it wanted from the experts.  Staff proceeded to interpret it in a way that was consistent with the status quo and, in fact, didn’t change anything. 
unmigrated-wiki-markup

Cheryl Langdon-Orr:              I’m just asking where is…  I think you’re doing two things -- you’re making an assumption on what the Rec 6 could or could not do.  I think you need to be a little bit cautious there because at least it has some standing, and I have no idea what the \[ADAT\] will or won’t have in terms of standing.\\              I’m just asking where is…  I think you’re doing two things – you’re making an assumption on what the Rec 6 could or could not do.  I think you need to be a little bit cautious there because at least it has some standing, and I have no idea what the [ADAT] will or won’t have in terms of standing.

And secondly, I wanted to ask a question.  Where is the output of [ADAT] going to be put into?  Where, what purpose, what body, where does the output go?  What happens to it?  Does it become a proposed statement from the ALAC and the GAC, from the hard argument as it’s something from the GAC that maybe we could discuss the issues as agenda items in part or whole?  Is it going to be something that the ALAC writes to the GNSO about?  Is it something that ALAC writes to the Board about?  I mean, I hear what you’re saying, and I don’t really care whether we call it Rec 6 Revisited, [ADAT], or my mother’s left leg.  It’s where does the output go to?  Where does it go? Wiki MarkupAnd secondly, I wanted to ask a question.  Where is the output of \[ADAT\] going to be put into?  Where, what purpose, what body, where does the output go?  What happens to it?  Does it become a proposed statement from the ALAC and the GAC, from the hard argument as it’s something from the GAC that maybe we could discuss the issues as agenda items in part or whole?  Is it going to be something that the ALAC writes to the GNSO about?  Is it something that ALAC writes to the Board about?  I mean, I hear what you’re saying, and I don’t really care whether we call it Rec 6 Revisited, \[ADAT\], or my mother’s left leg.  It’s where does the output go to?  Where does it go?\\

Evan Leibovitch:                     Okay, well, essentially the intention is that a small group of people would, either formally or informally, between themselves craft, “Here is a redline version of the AG as we would interpret what the Rec 6 group has already proposed.  Here is specific wording.”  So we would put that out essentially to anybody who would be interested in taking it on. 

...

Carlton Samuels:                     Can I make an interjection here?  I have to leave at 10:45 my time because I have to get back to close for 11:00 and I have to drive, so…
unmigrated-wiki-markup

Olivier Crepin-Leblond:                    Well, I think, Carlton, that we’ve actually beaten the \ [ADAT\] subject to death as well and so we can move on to the any other business part.\\

Evan Leibovitch:                     The only thing I would add before we go, since I have a hard stop also is that I’m going to be basically, totally non-ICANN for the rest of the day which includes the Rec 6 call that’s going to be taking place I think in a couple of hours.  So if any of you can participate in that call, it will be very important to understand the gist and the tone… the extent to which the existing Rec 6 is really driven to move forward because, that may actually influence the direction this goes.

...

Olivier Crepin-Leblond:          Okay, well, we’ll see in the future, but so far I think this has been very productive and I thank every one of you for having spent the time on this and I hope that we will certainly get some input from the RALOs.  The work doesn’t stop now; Rec 6 goes on later on today.  For the others, have a good break of a few hours before we track you down and get to talk at you.  With this and these words, and since it appear no one else has anything else to say, I’ll let you all take a break for a while and we can finish this call right now at 15:54 UTC.  Thank you very much and good bye.

Wiki Markup\[End of Transcript\]