Members:    Alan Greenberg, Athina Fragkouli, Becky Burr, Bruce Tonkin, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Jordan Carter, Julie Hammer, Leon Sanchez, Mathieu Weill, Olga Cavalli, Pär Brumark, Robin Gross, Roelof Meijer, Samantha Eisner, Sebastien Bachollet, Steve DelBianco, Thomas Rickert, Tijani Ben Jemaa   (18) 

Participants:  Aarti Bhavana, Alain Bidron, Albert Soto, Anne Aikman-Scalese, Avri Doria, Barrack Otieno, Brett Schaefer, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez, Corinne Cath, David Einhorn, David Maher, David McAuley, Edward Morris, Erika Mann, Finn Petersen, Giacomo Mazzone, Greg Shatan, Guru Acharya, James Gannon, Jorge Cancio, Kavouss Arasteh, Lito Ibarra, Lousewies van der Laan, Martin Boyle, Milton Mueller, Niels ten Oever, Paul Twomey, Pedro da Silva, Philip Corwin, Rafael Perez Galindo, Ron da Silva, Snehashish Ghosh, Sonigitu Ekpe, Stephen Deerhake, Suzanne Woolf, Tatiana Tropina, Tom Dale, Vrikson Acosta   (38)

Legal Counsel:  Edward McNicholas, Holly Gregory  (2)

Observers and Guests:  John Poole, Mandy Carver, Oscar Mike   (3)

Staff:  Bernard Turcotte, Berry Cobb, Brenda Brewer, Grace Abuhamad, Hillary Jett, Karen Mulberry, Marika Konings, Nigel Hickson, Theresa Swinehart, Trang Nguyen, Xavier Calvez, Yuko Green

Apologies:  Seun Ojedeji, Matthew Shears

**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**




1. Opening Remarks

2. Budget discussion

3. Preparation for WS2 kickoff in Helsinki

    • What to do before Helsinki
    • What are next steps (after Helsinki)

4. AOB

5. Closing Remarks


These high-level notes are designed to help you navigate through content of the call and do not substitute in any way the transcript.

1. Opening Remarks

  • Barrack Otieno on audio only

2. Budget discussion

  • TBenJemaa - Question about end of June deadline - just fiscal year. Work of sub-group is different than work parties. work of sub-groups is very
    important. Important to have transcription and the help of staff to draft.
  • TR - ICANN fiscal year is the only reason. for the second question let us hear more views on these topics.
  • SBacholet - 2 points - support for travel and participation to meeting - why are the co-chairs different and should be revised. B meeting will do a lot
    of work on WS2 topics and the co-chairs should participate. Second - Advisors - we should still have advisors.
  • OCavalli - Agree with Robin that not supporting members is not good. Diversity issue vs WS2 topics - how can we do this.
  • KArasteh - why do we need 9 groups? why not 4 or 20? Travel support is definitely an issue especially from developing economies.
  • PDeSilva - In favour of keeping the advisors. We may need to review areas of expertise for WS2 but we need them. We also need staff to draft documents.
  • JCarter - the topics are what they are and were agreed in Marrakech - they do not limit participation. Subgroups need to understand that they
    cannot present their results to the CCWG as a fait accompli - the CCWG will decide.
  • TRickert - transcripts and drafting - leadership will take these back to the chartering organizations to see if there is support for this. Similarly, for travel
    support. We need to come up with suggestions to streamline this and be more cost efficient vs WS1. Advisors we will get back to this later today.
  • RGross - transcripts are important. Advisors to join as other participants. CCWG MEMBERS should be supported to attend ICANN meeting. On combining some
    of the 9 topics - we need to be careful as some of those topics were already an amalgamation of a number of topics (transparency is an example of this).
  • TRickert - The 9 sub-teams seems an efficient approach but it is up to the group if they wish to readjust.
  • KArasteh - If a majority in favour of transcripts we should do it. 9 groups seems too large - combining some topics so we have less than 9 would facilitate
    participation. How many other face to face meetings and reconsider travel support?
  • AGreenberg - if we have costs they should be shared. For B meetings flying people half way around the world for 1 day makes no sense.
  • TRickert - Advisors? keep or not?
  • ADoria - If we are talking about limiting travel support advisors are not an issue. Their voices were valuable in WS1 and they provide a view on out work to a
    wider community. If the Advisors are not on our budget.
  • AGreenberg - if only travel expenses then we could decide when we need them at a meeting.
  • TRickert - we will work on the next version of this and then share with the group.
  • MWeill - JGannon - only 24 hours to finalize? we will try to negotiate an extension.


3. Preparation for WS2 kickoff in Helsinki

  • MWeill - this is to start our work on process so we do not have to do this in Helsinki.
  • MWeill - Diversity to be fixed on slide.
  • MWeill - Presentation of the slides.
  • Any qustions comments?
  • JCancio - ad hoc meetings?
  • JHammer - issue of doing everything concurrently could create issues.
  • MWeill - yes the CCWG has to decide on this. This will be a challenge - but nothing is cast in stone at this point.
  • AGreenberg - ALAC will be discussing in Helsinki how to get more people involved in sub-groups who have something to contribute.
  • PTwomey - can people access the lightning talks remotely in Helsinki?
  • MWeill – yes interactive remote participation,  transcripts etc. for Helsinki. Mostly plenary time in Helsinki.
  • TBenJemaa - question sub-groups in charge in public comments or CCWG.
  • MWeill - its a CCWG public comment.
  • (chat) Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): Bernie and Robin, Please see para 54 of Annex 04:  "Guidelines for standards of conduct that will be presumed to be
    in good faith  (for example, conducting reasonable due diligence as to the truthfulness of a statement) will be developed in Work Stream 2."
  • (chat) Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: Please try to review the document I circulated on 26-May, regarding how to synchronize ATRT3 and the 6 projects
    in WS2 that are about Accountability too prior to Helsinki.

4. AOB

  • LSanchez - would like to request our lawyers to respond on the Articles of Incorporation public consultation. Any objections?
  • HGregory  - since these were drafted by Adler and reviewed by Sidley they do meet the CCWG requirements - no further comments needed.
  • JCancio - On articles I sent email and fits with what Holly said. It would be useful for us not following this closely to have a table to explain the changes vs our report.
  • LSanchez - we should certify this (footnotes)
  • (chat) jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):  - a table explaining each change and what part of the CCWG or ICG report they originate from
  • (chat) Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): Yes Jorge.  We (Adler/Sidley)  can prepare.
  • LSanchez - no other business

5. Adjourned.

Action Items


Adobe Chat

  Brenda Brewer: (5/31/2016 13:29) Welcome all to the CCWG ACCT Meeting #94 on 31 May 2016 @ 19:00 UTC!  Please note that chat sessions are being archived and follow the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior:

  Olga Cavalli: (13:56) Hi Brenda, can the operator do a dial out to me? + 54 1xxxxxxx

  Brenda Brewer: (13:56) Yes, Olga!

  Olga Cavalli: (13:57) Thanks Brenda!

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (13:57) All please remember to mute if you are not speaking

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (13:58) hi all

  Niels ten Oever: (13:58) Hi all

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (13:58) Hello everyone

  Becky Burr: (13:58) hello everyone. 

  Tatiana Tropina: (13:59) hi all!

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (13:59) Hi all!

  Pedro da Silva - [GAC Brasil]: (13:59) Hello everyone!

  Lousewies van der Laan: (13:59) Good evening everyone

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:00) Hello again all

  Olga Cavalli: (14:00) Hello everyone!

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (14:00) feels we haven't talk to each other in ages!

  Tom Dale (ACIG GAC Secretariat): (14:01) Good morning all

  Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (14:01) hello all!

  Pedro da Silva - [GAC Brasil]: (14:01) Por supuesto, Leon :-)

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (14:01) Ya se les extraña Pedro!

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:01) buenas tardes!

  Pedro da Silva - [GAC Brasil]: (14:01) Muchísimo!

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:01) Greetings from San Francisco!

  Roelof Meijer (SIDN, ccNSO): (14:02) Good day, everyone! Great to be back. I hope ; )

  Pär Brumark (GAC Niue): (14:02) Hi all!

  Alberto Soto: (14:02) Hello all from Buenos Aires!!

  James Gannon: (14:02) Wow, CCWG is not finished already? =)

  nigel hickson: (14:04) good evening

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:05) the ccwg is the evil force

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:05) Darth Rickert and Sith Leon

  James Gannon: (14:05) I agree with that one Jorge!

  James Gannon: (14:05) Did we have a community power to splill the cochairs?

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:05) What, all of them? @James

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:05) That is WS3 James

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:06) mutatis mutandis...

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:06) If co-chairs survive till WS3.

  James Gannon: (14:06) Then WS4, Return of the CoChairs?

  Avri Doria: (14:06) this is what i assumed, glad i was right.  only thing i forgot was that it was just the cchairs working with staff but a whle leadership team.

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (14:06) Mathieu Weider

  Avri Doria: (14:07) way too soon.

  Avri Doria: (14:07) oops wrong chat

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:07) now joinining adobe

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:10) What do you mean by May 2016.

  James Gannon: (14:10) Kavouss mute your mic

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:10) typist please mute

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:10) We we have to make a miracle

  Olga Cavalli: (14:10) Berni sounds low

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:11) Hi Olga, Bernie sounds fine here

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:11) what is the mechanism by which the CCWG members hold its co-chairs accountable?

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:12) Robin, there is mechanism in the Charter to complain about co chairs. Goes through the SO/AC chairs I believe

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:12) acoountable to whom

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:12) what is the complain issue

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:13) Who complained

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:13) Any member who disagrees with the consensus-level designation made by the Chair(s), or believes that his/her contributions are being systematically ignored or discounted should first discuss the circumstances with the relevant sub-group chair or the CCWG-Accountability co-chairs. In the event that the matter cannot be resolved satisfactorily, the group member should request an opportunity to discuss the situation with the Chairs of the chartering organizations or their designated representatives.

  Alan Greenberg: (14:13) I can only speak about the ALAC, but we have a mechanism to withdraw an appointment if we decide there is cause. That would apply to our five Members and that of course includes the co-chair.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:14) what are these issues,

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:14) WITHDRAW?

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:14) dIOSTITUTION

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:15) what you are talkinfg about

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:15) All of the sudden new issues comes

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:15) Robin

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:16) Whom do you complain of?

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:16) ALAN ,WHOM DO YOU WISH TO DISTITUE?

  James Gannon: (14:17) Are we planning on all 9 topics in paralell?

  Alan Greenberg: (14:18) Kavouss, I have no plan to remove anyone. Robin asked what mechanisms we have to ensure the accountability of our c-chairs. I pointed out that in the case of the ALAC, we could remove our co-chair if we wished.

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (14:18) James, that is to be discussed, but it is unlikely we will have the bandwith to do all of them in parallel

  Alan Greenberg: (14:18) we have no such current plans!

  James Gannon: (14:18) Yup was going to say the same

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (14:18) bandwidth that is

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:19) Everyone loves every member of this team, Bernie, for the record

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:19) +1 Mathieu

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (14:19) +1, Mathieu

  Brenda Brewer: (14:19) +1 Mathieu!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:19) :-)


  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:19) well, "love"... :D

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:20) love love (+1 from me)

  Becky Burr: (14:20) admires and respects ...

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:20) as long as love isn't compulsory, all good

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:20) aT LEAST WE SHOULD NOT HATE EACH OTHER

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:20) the only thing I hate is capitals

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:20) Should we call for consensus on love ?

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:21) (not governmental capitals)

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:21) (caps lock is very disturbing indeed)

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:21) Mathieu, only if both members and participants can vote :)

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:21) Sorry Jordan

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:22) Pls do not hate any thing be kind

  Milton Mueller: (14:22) Awwww

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:22) OK. Thanks Kavouss :)

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:23) World is too small and life is too short .No room to hate

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:23) For certain!

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:23) can these slides be scrollable, please?

  Brenda Brewer: (14:24) you may scroll now!

  Roelof Meijer (SIDN, ccNSO): (14:24) so from now on, we will be known as icann's ccwg acct

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:24) Thanks for explanation Thomas and Bernie. CWG used design teams to finish their proposal – do you know if they had full transcription and if not did the lack of it create any major problems?

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:24) So no more travel support for CCWG members, just like for Helsinki.

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (14:25) this is what is being proposed Robin

  Olga Cavalli: (14:26) cannot hear Tijani :(

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:26) can't him either.

  James Gannon: (14:26) We did not David, but I think some of the larger DTs I belive wished they had

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:26) I BARELY HEAR tIJANI

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:26) hear

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:26) VERY hard to hear

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:26) iT IS TOO LOW

  Carlos Raúl: (14:26) can't hear Tijani

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:26) Thanks James

  James Gannon: (14:26) Or may have gotten at a later stage

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:26) I can not

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (14:27) @David -- we will have transcription.  By using inside  staff resources, it will take  a few days to receive the transcript -- instead of 24 hour turnaround

  Avri Doria: (14:27) nope, have not been able to parse what is being said.  but figured i could read the transcript later.

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:27) Thanks Steve

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:27) The question is not clear

  Greg Shatan: (14:27) CWG DTs were designed to be relatively short-term and to bring issues back to the main group relatively quickly.  It's a different model.

  James Gannon: (14:27) Agree Greg

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:27) Thomas can you pls repeat what Tijani is talking about

  Greg Shatan: (14:28) Each of these teams are more like mini-WGs

  James Gannon: (14:28) Yes DT's were quite narrow targetted

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:28) Good point Greg

  James Gannon: (14:29) For the record FY17 for ICANN starts this July

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:29) Agree with Tijani

  Tijani BEN JEMAA: (14:29) exactly

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:29) How many drafting team we will have

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (14:30) I do not see the need to retain formal advisors. But would invite them to participate to whatever extent they desire

  Niels ten Oever 2: (14:30) +1

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:30) Agree, Steve.

  James Gannon: (14:30) I agree Steve, they have served us and now I think they can continue as paricipants if they wish

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:30) Why Icann abandonned the CCWG MEMBERS TO BE SUPPORTED

  James Gannon: (14:30) Cost

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:30) +1 to Steve from me too

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:31) I don't mind the Advisors retiring

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:31) Nothing is free of charge

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:31) I was disappointed by the proposal to withdrawl travel support for CCWG members. 

  Olga Cavalli: (14:31) +1 to Robin´s comment

  Niels ten Oever 2: (14:32) Technical comment: people are hardly audible in the Android app whereas in webapp on by laptop sounds great.

  Niels ten Oever 2: (14:32) *my

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:32) +1 to Robin. I am not a member, but I am very disapponted that all the members who worked hard can't participate in F2F

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:34) Some issues will overlap, for example "transparency" will overlap with both "staff accountability" and "SO/AC accountability".  So they aren't entirely discrete subject matter.

  Becky Burr: (14:34) I did not understand Bernie to say that we would run 9 subgroups in parallel

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (14:34) I was assuming we might combine seom of the 9 projects into fewer than 9 groups

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:35) quite the opposite thaat only some could run in parralell due to limited human bandwidth

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (14:35) there are 9 WS2 topics, its up to the CCWG to decide the order and the combining

  Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez: (14:35) Thank you very much for your comments Kavous

  Olga Cavalli: (14:36) +1 to Pedro´s comments

  James Gannon: (14:37) I think that we need to just make a formal callfor our advisris to join the WS2 items as suit their experience, just dont agree with them being kept and supported particularly if we are taking support away from members

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:37) Agree with Pedro on the advisors - another question is how we integrate the advisors' input better

  Rafael Perez Galindo (GAC Spain): (14:37) +1 Pedro and Jorge and Tijani, staff should be used for drafting as well...

  Avri Doria: (14:39) i like the DT approach.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:39) Agree   Jordan +++

  James Gannon: (14:39) Robin in the Q

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (14:40) DT = Drafting Team.  It does not mean Decision Team

  Aarti Bhavana: (14:40) Can we also have notes for at least plenary meetings? They have been extremely useful

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:40) :-)

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:40) we'll definitely get notes as well as full transcripts for plenary meetings

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:41) Aarti, there will be transcripts for CCWG plenary meetings

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:41) I don't mind much either way about travel support, but I recognise that I am in a fortunate position in that my employer will pay for that for me.

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:41) legal costs should be lower this time... I would dare to say...

  Aarti Bhavana: (14:41) Slide 6 says no note-taking by staff beyond action items. I was referring to the high level notes

  Aarti Bhavana: (14:42) Or is that just for subgroups?

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:42) i read it as so

  Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez: (14:42) clear and loud Robin

  Corinne Cath: (14:43) +1 Robin

  Guru Acharya: (14:43) +1 Robin

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:43) Robin, absolutely +1

  James Gannon: (14:43) I would like to see the cost calc for transcripts, on various timelines, 24h,48h etc

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:44) I support transcripts for the groups because I think the record is important, but my experience of  WP1 was that transcripts weren't all that useful because of the nature of the conversations

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:44) they were more 'working' for prepping docs, essentially

  Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez: (14:45) @jordan transcripts plus the editorial work of the people in charge would be very value adding. I agree that transcripts ALONE may not be very usefull

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:45) Jordan, my experience is different - there might be arguments on every calls what we agreed on and who said what. Transcripts help.

  Avri Doria: (14:45) i also do not expect we will have the same level of outside legal costs, i expect the bulk of the expesnes.  lets not be pennywsie and pound foolish.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:45) they deinitely help, not disagreeing with that

  Tijani BEN JEMAA: (14:45) I support the 9 subthemes plus the IRP

  Greg Shatan: (14:45) Not all of those in the commercial stakeholder group have employers who will cover the costs of participation.  And some who do, can only get support some of the time....

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:45) and if one misses the call - going through the recording is just miserable.

  Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez: (14:46) @Tatiana +1

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:46) Greg, well at least you can get it covered sometimes :( Civil society has, um, much less chances.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:46) I just think we should use the Internet as and where we can, most of the time - we should make online/adobe our default working mode

  Avri Doria: (14:46) takes less tme to read than to listen.  i read transtipts far more often than i listen to the recording.  cuts the time to catch up, or go back to check what was actually said, by half or even more.

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:47) Not all 9 topics will require the same degree of intensity - some are more "technical" and/or narrow. Others are quite general and may give rise to ong discussions

  Rafael Perez Galindo (GAC Spain): (14:47) +1 Tatiana, going through the recording is hell

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:47) Avri, yes. +1

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:47) good point, jorge.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:47) (my last comment is re travel/f2f meetings)

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:47) Jorge, yes. And some of them will require more time - like HR FoI

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:47) you shouldn't have to attend an in person meeting to have a real say, basically

  Avri Doria: (14:48) just abput to raise my hand, oh well. 

  Greg Shatan: (14:48) Tatiana, some get it covered all the time, others sometimes, others not at all.  Often, the sometimes support indicates that the employer is not supportive of going to that meeting...

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:49) Greg, I totally understand this. I am not trying to say that you guys have a kind of privileged position. Just saying that it is different

  James Gannon: (14:50) +1Alan

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:50) In this sense - I am privileged, my employer will never ask questions if I secure a funding to go somewhere.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:50) but we are defining what we need, not how much it costs

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:50) Another way to cut costs for CCWG would be to refrain from decisions like flying Ira Magaziner to Singapore and to LA to talk the CCWG out of the membership model.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:50) once we know what we need, it can be costed?

  Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez: (14:50) @Alan:  don´t want to see the lawyers numbers, thank you. :)

  Greg Shatan: (14:50) Like the Great and Powerful Oz, I might prefer that you believe that I have bottomless resources at my disposal.

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:51) Well, no one has bottomless resources, even Greg :)

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:51) we aren't 'bulk funded' as it were

  Greg Shatan: (14:51) +1 Robin -- I don't think we were consulted about that pep talk....

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:51) No gurus needed :-)

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:51) but the costs could be better spen on transcripts

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:52) spent, that is

  James Gannon: (14:52) I just want to make the point that if we are to take ownership of or costs as ICANN has requested we need to make informed choices and decisions,

  James Gannon: (14:52) And that extends to cost estimations

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:52) yes but think about the order.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:53) 1. Define needs. 2. Cost those needs. 3. Consider trade offs. 4. Finalise budget.

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (14:53) +1 Jordan. Wise

  Greg Shatan: (14:53) I don't think we should be participating in just some of the budget decisions....  We should be more clued in.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (14:53) the alternative of a capped budget without knowing what the actual needs are is... well... worse

  James Gannon: (14:53) Ok but we have 24h to present this according to the slides....

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:53) On advisors: there have already been some comments

  David McAuley (RySG): (14:54) On costs, does keeping advisors implicate travel costs?

  Guru Acharya: (14:54) Thats really mean jorge. "jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): No gurus needed :-)"

  Guru Acharya: (14:54) ;)

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:55) ohh... my apologies, Guru :-S

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:56) it would be odd to pay travel costs of advisors but not to members

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:56) Good point from Avri on the added value of the advisors

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:56) Agree with Robin

  Avri Doria: (14:56) exctly, if ICANN is paying for not travel, then they shold not be funded either.

  Greg Shatan: (14:57) Travel for all, or travel for none!  Raise the banner high, and man the barricades!

  Kavouss Arasteh: (14:57) Advisers are there to advise members. If memnbers are absent there is little need for advise

  James Gannon 2: (14:57) Bernie: Can u clarify if we have 24h to finalise this as according to the slides it says End May.. which is today?

  Avri Doria: (14:57) Greg, works for me.  Bt only men needed on the barricade?

  James Gannon 2: (14:58) Ok thanks Matthieu

  Greg Shatan: (14:59) Woman the barricades, too!

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:59) better nobody goes to the barricades

  James Gannon 2: (14:59) Are we forming the Nights Watch for ICANN now?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:59) :-)

  Niels ten Oever 2: (14:59) Diversity, as Greg mentioned, needs it's own bullet :)

  Tatiana Tropina: (14:59) Barricades might lead to guillotines...

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (14:59) diversity is a meta-bullet

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (14:59) where did the topic about standards of conduct of board members become a ws2 issue?

  Avri Doria: (15:00) i dont know

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:00) I don't think we ever said we would have a discussion of things to be presumed good conduct by the board.  This seems odd.  Can someone explain what that is?  Thanks.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:00) Pls refain to call them DESIGN tEAM AS THEY DO NOT DESIGN ANY THING

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:01) sUB GROUP i HAVE NO PROBLEM

  Avri Doria: (15:01) they design solutions, structures and modalities

  Greg Shatan: (15:01) That concerns me too. It implies that there's a standard that, if met, would prevent removal of that Board member.  But that's not how it works....

  James Gannon 2: (15:01) Design Team describes it accurately

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:01) nOT AT ALL.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:01) Right, Greg.  What is that and where did it come from?

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:01) iT WAS USED BY cwg

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:01) so no unbalanced sub-group leaders then

  James Gannon 2: (15:02) Yes go ahead

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:02) I have NP using the term Design Team or Drafting Team  the DT  is all interchangeble from Y  POV  as it all needs to come back to PLenary

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (15:02) @Robin a request from the lawyers when implementing the Bylaws from our final report - I will get you the reference after this call if you need it

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:03) Thanks, Bernie.  And what did CCWG's attorneys (as opposed to ICANN's counsel) have to suggest on it?

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:04) DT OR dg

  Avri Doria: (15:04) is this to help the Board in its process of dismissing one of their own for casue?

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (15:04) If I remember correctly it was our counsel that brought it up but was agreed by all lawsyers

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:05) Bernie, either way, it is contrary to what ccwg said on substance, so that will likely be a problem to change the substance this way.

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (15:05) Let me provide you the reference after the call and then you can see if there is an issue

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:06) thanks, would appreciate it.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:06) the CCWG was clear there would be a discussion about the norms the commnity expects Board members to follow

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:06) and equally clear that such norms would play NO role as "thresholds" for any removal action by the EC

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:06) the subgroups could have ad hoc meetings during the ICANN meetings, right?

  Greg Shatan: (15:06) If it's abouit Board removal of Board members, that's one thing.  Community removal is another.  But that will all be part of the discussion I guess.  We don't want to run out of things to discuss.

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:06) well some members can't get to Helsinki, Jordan, so it would be a problem for us

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:06) they are not inconsistent, not contradictory, and both useful and necessary in my view. How should Board Members assess what the community expects of them if it doesn't set out its expectations?

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:07) Please copy me as well Bernie.  I dont recall the issue but will go back to Adler and weigh in once you provide us with your notes.  I believe if it was added it has a linkage to the CCWG proposal. 

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (15:07) our Work Party 1 met in Singapore to work on our draft doc.  We did not require staff support for that meeting

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (15:07) I will publish to the list

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:09) Robin, Greg: it was part of the "dublin compromise" - Board members accepted there would be no objective standards for removal, but people generally thought it was useful to set out norms the community expects Board members to follow.

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:09) +1 Jordan:  "the CCWG was clear there would be a discussion about the norms the commnity expects Board members to follow;"  That is what I generally recall

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:09) Jordan, that is quite a stretch from reasons that prevent them from being removed.  The devil is in the details. 

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:09) I guess people thought board member removals were less likely to be a "surprise" if there was some understanding of what reasonable expectations were :-)

  Alan Greenberg: (15:09) Wasn't worried. Just a head's up.

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:09) ALAC should share any pitch they have to lure more people in :-)

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:09) :-)  Mattheu   you notticed

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:10) Robin: yes, but there's nothing in the bylaws that allows standards to be imposedrequired

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:10) The group must remained open

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:10) and I cannot imaginethe CCWG would agree to recommend such as part of WS2

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:10) I'd certainly fight it, even on the barricades ;)

  Alberto Soto: (15:10) My apologies, I must leave the meeting. Kind regards!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:10) Open is essential

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:11) Agree Jordan that theyere is no requirement  -- a discussion item for CCWG to determine - wide open discretion for CCWG to determine

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:11) Tranparency is a basic element of our work and thus the grou must be open

  Greg Shatan: (15:11) Sunny until late at night.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:12) Mathieu

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:12) There is no DESINING iSSUE THUS NO DESIGN TEAM

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:12) cALL THEM DIFFRENTLY

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:13) dRAFTING tEAM

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:13) dRAFTING gROUP

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:13) How will the "lightning talks" themes and presenters be selected?

  James Gannon: (15:13) There is of course design going on, design and creation of frameworks, processes etc

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:13) sUB gROUPS

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:13) dESIGN OF WHAT

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:13) wHAT DOES THE PEOPLE DESGIN?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:14) Cll it Drafting Team if you prefer Kvous

  Pedro da Silva - [GAC Brasil]: (15:14) @Jorge: I guess it would be on avoluntary basis

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:14) Solutions.

  Avri Doria: (15:14) several of us have answered: solutions, structure, processes ... 

  Pedro da Silva - [GAC Brasil]: (15:14) a voluntary*

  Paul Twomey: (15:14) Will peole not attending Helsink be able to access these lightning talks easily?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:14) Just say DT

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:14) How will the "lightning talks" themes and presenters be selected?

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:14) Robin, Please see Para 54 of Annex 4 of Proposal

  Sonigitu Ekpe: (15:14) Dear All, Greetings from Zanzibar. Sorry for being late.

  Grace Abuhamad: (15:15) Yes, there will be usual remote participation in Helsinki.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:15) I am relying on remote participation

  Tatiana Tropina: (15:15) there has already been a proposal on the list.

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (15:15) will we be in plenary all day Sunday, or do we anticipate breaking-out into sub groups?

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (15:16) If we do sub-group breakouts, remote participation won't be effective

  Sonigitu Ekpe: (15:16) It will be great to break out into sub-groups.

  James Gannon: (15:16) Me, Grace and Sebastian can run around with laptops again =)

  David McAuley (RySG): (15:16) What will be the result of the lightning talk

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:16) no, plenary please for sub groups

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:16) for lightning talks

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:17) Hey James  it worked  quite the innovation IMO

  Sonigitu Ekpe: (15:17) The sub-group will report back and remote participants can contribute at that stage

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (15:18) Please try to review the document I circulated on 26-May, regarding how to synchronize ATRT3 and the 6 projects in WS2 that are about Accountability too

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:19) Bernie and Robin, Please see para 54 of Annex 04:  "Guidelines for standards of conduct that will be presumed to be in good faith  (for exampole, conducting reasonable due didlgence as to the truthfulness of a statement) will be de3veloped in Work Stream 2."

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:19) apologies for bad typing

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (15:20) If I am not mistaken, that point was asked for by Alan and / or Tijani, right?

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (15:22) the community can remove board members irrespective of the definitions of "good faith".  Those apply to the board members' fiduciary duties, but that is different from and not meant to prevent the community from removing board members for other reasons

  Bruce Tonkin: (15:23) @Steve - one thought would be to foucs the ATRT3 on reviewing the changes made since the last ATRT2 - and use the working stream 2 to look at furhter improvements.

  Bruce Tonkin: (15:23) ie separate "review" from the development of "solutions"

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (15:23) True, Bruce.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:23) Robin, agree.

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:23) Robin, I am just pointing out the source.  It is fully consistent with what is on the slide

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (15:23) but ATRT3 memebers might not be keen on being so constrained in their scope!

  Bruce Tonkin: (15:24) IN the past our review teams have generally identified the problems - and therei si furtgher work via policy development or other means with the communiyt to come up with solutions.

  Bruce Tonkin: (15:24) For example ATRT2 recommended a review of the ombudsman function - I had always seen the CCWG as the body that comes up with changes of rhte Ombudsman.   So work stream 2 is actually part of the implementation of ATRT2

  Avri Doria: (15:24) Steve, i think there is merrit in your proposal, read it but had no comment.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:25) Just so Bruce, I suspect though we need to be SMART about how WS2 and ATRT3 activities are planned and co-ordinate

  Bruce Tonkin: (15:25) Agreed @Cheryl

  James Gannon: (15:26) Lets hope that your billing coordinator doesent review the transcripts Holly =)

  Anne Aikman-Scalese: (15:27) I thought Leon said he wanted Hollly and Rosemary to review the public comments, not the Articles they drafted.

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (15:27) Anne I was refering to the AOI

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:27) we arehappy to review the public comment.  I understood that Leon was asking for a review of the Articles to assess whether consistent with  the CCWG Proposal

  Anne Aikman-Scalese: (15:28) Yes - but I thought you wanted them to review the public consultation, not the AOI themselves

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:28) We are happy to prepare a chart describing why each change is there.

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:28) WHAT IS THIS BACKGROUND SOUND

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:29) yes

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:29)  - a table explaining each change and what part of the CCWG or ICG report they originate from

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:30) Yes Jorge.  We (Adler/Sidley)  can prepare

  Kavouss Arasteh: (15:30) BYE BYE

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:30) thanks Holly!

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (15:30) Thank you everyone !

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:30) Bye

  James Gannon: (15:30) Thanks all

  Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (15:30) thank you all! bye

  jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): (15:30) thanks and bye!

  Brett Schaefer: (15:30) Holly, could you also include in your explaination why the text was originally included in the AoI? I'm specifically referring to  Subsection (e) of Article 5, which was deleted. I understand it may not be necessary, but I'm interestedin why it was originaly included. Thx. 

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (15:30) bye all

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley): (15:30) by all!

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (15:30) bye team

  Bruce Tonkin: (15:30) bye all

  Avri Doria: (15:30) bye all,

  Olga Cavalli: (15:30) bye!

  nigel hickson: (15:30) good bye

  • No labels