Sub-group Members: Alan Greenberg, Avri Doria, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Erich Schweighofer, Farzaneh Badii, Herb Waye, Jorge Villa, Kavouss Arasteh, Sebastien Bachollet, Steve DelBianco (10)
Staff: Bernard Turcotte, Brenda Brewer
Apologies: Olga Cavalli, Christopher Wilkinson, Greg Shatan
** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to email@example.com **
0. Call Admin and Roll Call / Apologies (2min-CLO)
1. Welcome - Opening Remarks - Our aim and purpose for today's call (3-5 min-CLO)
2. Review (brief) of last meeting records here and any Action Items (5-10 min- SDB, FB)
SDB and FB have updated the document per comments.
3. Primary Agenda Item - Discussion (25 -35 min SDB, FB, CLO)
Based upon the finalisation of our review of Public Comment documentation, this meeting will begin the finalization of our report and consider to submit Final Report for CCWG consideration in September Plenary
- CCWG still need to FINALLY determine if any changes to our report are significant or not.
- If changes are (as we predict) not significant, CCWG-Accountability WS2 can forward final recommendations to Chartering Organizations for approval, and then to the ICANN Board for consideration and adoption. Noting the timeline and Key milestone dates:- This will require that we lodge or Final Report by Sept 20th for consideration by the CCWG Plenary at our meeting on September 27th.
Raw Captioning Notes
Disclaimer: This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing, misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate
review and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way.
- Recommendation of term limits still divergent. Text explaining this should go to the list which will ask for comments within 72 hours.
- There will be a call on 14 September 1900 to finalize the report and decide if the sub-group recommends an additional public consultation on these to the Plenary.
- Rapporteurs will draft a statement for the list as per the above decision.
Brenda Brewer: (9/7/2017 07:33) Good day! Welcome to SOAC Accountability Subgroup Meeting #32 on 7 September 2017 @ 13:00 UTC!
Brenda Brewer: (07:33) When not speaking, please mute your phone by pressing *6 (star 6). To unmute, *6. This call is recorded.
Brenda Brewer: (07:34) Reminder to all, for captioning and transcription, please state your name before speaking and speak slowly.
Kavouss Arasteh: (07:50) Hi Brenda
Kavouss Arasteh: (07:51) Hi Jemie
Brenda Brewer: (07:52) Hi!
Brenda Brewer: (07:58) Kavouss, dial out to you now at the temporary number you provided.
Kavouss Arasteh: (07:59) NBrenda when I pressed 1 it does not connect
Brenda Brewer: (08:00) if on mobile, you need to turn off phone and back on.
Herb Waye Ombuds: (08:00) Good day everyone
Brenda Brewer: (08:00) please let me know when you have powered back on, Kavouss, and I will dial out again. Thank you!
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:01) I give you another no.
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:01) See yr mail
Brenda Brewer: (08:02) ok
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:05) pls dial new no.
Steve DelBianco: (08:05) https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1sT6SscZLT7VK2rVFOMPaiK1Qd8vlVLkm0boRX7I8ru0_edit-23&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=kbiQDH54980u4nTPfwdloDLY6-6F24x0ArAvhdeDvvc&m=YEit12WXjWqrA1ACq0s_ybJ4stJsS88FM-40Shn_P6Q&s=CgTI3_Oi2YMpRsFikCOD9UnDFz-8lSdnp_5b3XaBxmc&e=
Brenda Brewer: (08:06) Kavouss, that number will not go through. Please confim you sent correct sequence. Thank you.
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:08) Steve, can we decide ,at the first instance, whether in our view the changes are not suff icient anf they are sufficient we tell CCWG
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:09) I am not on adobe bridge
Steve DelBianco: (08:09) An AC/SO/Group that elects its officers should consider term limits. [not a consensus item, so should be discussed with CCWG]
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:09) pls advise the operator to dial my second no. tks
Cheryl Langdon-Orr 2: (08:10) Noted Kavouss I beleive Brenda / staff are doing this...
Brenda Brewer: (08:10) Contacting operator, Kavouss. Please stand by.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr 2: (08:10) Can however you let us know here if you have any other comments regrding our now Final Draft Report
Farzaneh Badii: (08:10) we can do a summary of changes to ccwg
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:11) Farzane+1
Steve DelBianco: (08:12) I would note that our submission to CCWG could describe our public comment response document
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:12) Brenda, did you advise to dial the new no. pls
Brenda Brewer: (08:12) Yes, Kavouss.
Steve DelBianco: (08:13) 3 of our work team members support the Term Limits.
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:13) Cheryl,
Steve DelBianco: (08:14) At least 3 members opposed it.
Alan Greenberg: (08:15) On call now.
Bernard Turcotte- ICANN: (08:16) correct
Farzaneh Badii: (08:16) we can just provide them with a background. it is simple
Cheryl Langdon-Orr 2: (08:17) Yes I understand that Steve but his cincern is valid , yet we do have the resistance to this recimmendation to deal with
Steve DelBianco: (08:18) Brenda -- can you please display the report, at page 7. To show the text on Term Limits.
Steve DelBianco: (08:20) Thank you Brenda.
Bernard Turcotte- ICANN: (08:21) Alan hand
Farzaneh Badii: (08:23) what you are saying Alan can apply to all of our recommendations
Steve DelBianco: (08:24) If we go to list, we would request responses within 2 days or so. We need to close this issue
avri doria: (08:24) the report is just asking them to consider them.
Alan Greenberg: (08:25) Rememeber, it is a hard limit which can then be CONSIDERED. So it does not really change the impact.
Steve DelBianco: (08:25) @Avri -- all Good Practices are recommended for "consideration", actually
avri doria: (08:25) i guess i am missing the problem
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:26) What term limt?
Steve DelBianco: (08:26) what would we have as our voting rule for the Term Limit question? a ratio of support vs oppose?
avri doria: (08:28) that group does have term limits.
Alan Greenberg: (08:29) SEbastien, for clarity, was your example that a person can be on the Board for 9 years?
avri doria: (08:31) besides not being a SOAC, perhaps you are syaing that they should expand their term limit language to include laisions. but that is not what is being asked for.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:31) well I think Bernie as a staff member should not get involved too much with substantive issues
Sebastien (ALAC): (08:31) No Alan 15 years (6 + 9)
avri doria: (08:33) ie. we have people who think that asking people to consider term limits is something we should not do?
Alan Greenberg: (08:33) Ah so including Liaisons, which I don't think is in Farzi's proposal.
avri doria: (08:34) or is it that we have people who dislike the way term limits have been defined in some cases.
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:34) My line is iterrupted
Farzaneh Badii: (08:35) Accusation/?
Farzaneh Badii: (08:35) no sorry, procedural recommendations welcome, substantive recommendations no. it's for the group to decide
Brenda Brewer: (08:35) I will have operator call you again, Kavouss.
Steve DelBianco: (08:36) page 8 of our report: AC/SO/Groups are only expected to implement Good Practices to the extent that these practices are applicable and an improvement over present practices, in the view of AC/SO/Group participants. Again, we do not recommend that implementation of these practices be required by AC/SO/Groups.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:38) 15 years with term limits? :)
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:38) Brenda, I am disconnected
Bernard Turcotte- ICANN: (08:38) @Kavouss Brenda working on reconnecting you
jorge villa (ASO: (08:39) the good practices are not a synonim of a rule to follow. the good practices are recommendatiosns based on the real life experiences that may help others to go ahead and to do things in a right way, but never have to be assumed as a must
avri doria: (08:39) included and implcit in the term good practice is the fact that it is not universally so.
Herb Waye Ombuds: (08:39) I must leave the call, wishing everyone a great morning/afternoon/evening.
avri doria: (08:39) Consider it and give the reasons why it is a bad idea.
avri doria: (08:40) so perhaps when considering term limits they should do so carefully.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:41) yes Avri we can qualify it
avri doria: (08:41) nd define ones that do not work as disincentives.
Steve DelBianco: (08:41) my question is, do we think term limits are a Good Practice?
avri doria: (08:41) yeah i give up on this topic.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr 2: (08:42) noted Avri but please do type anything you wish here if you want
avri doria: (08:42) when living in an environemtn where the mening of words such as should and condier are to be ignfroed, what else can one do.
jorge villa (ASO: (08:43) we are oo revamping the SO/ACs, we are only recommending how they can do things in a better way
avri doria: (08:43) is anyone who doesn't hold office disagree with term limits?
Alan Greenberg: (08:43) SOME COUNTRIES have term limits. Not all (and not all truly Democratic ones).
avri doria: (08:44) Alnn, thn consider and deide that in your group they are not needed.
Steve DelBianco: (08:44) we should not have the word "Consider" as part of the Good practice. That is creating confusion.
Steve DelBianco: (08:45) Right, Kavouss. That is the standard: Good Practices, that should be implemented if applicable and an immprovement over current practices
avri doria: (08:46) why eliminate the word. isn't it considering terms limits that is good paractice.
Bernard Turcotte- ICANN: (08:47) time check - 14 minutes left on call
Steve DelBianco: (08:47) Good to consider, or Good to implement? All of our other Good Practices are about implementation
avri doria: (08:47) it says good to consider. i would go with that.
avri doria: (08:48) i was not suggesting it go to the list, but am fine with that too.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:48) I suggested to go to the list
avri doria: (08:49) i was answering Steve questions about wheher consideration was the good practice of term limits were.
Steve DelBianco: (08:49) Your 3 rapporteurs have differing views on the Term Limit, but we will find a consensus way of putting this question to our group
Alan Greenberg: (08:52) I could raise an interesting case of a group with HARD sterm limits, where 1 perosn has been on the group for 9 oyears of its 15 year's existence...
Farzaneh Badii: (08:53) well I can make multiple examples like that for groups that dont have term limits Alan. term limits at least constrain groups to some extent and incentivise training future leaders
avri doria: (08:54) so you want to make the suggestion harder so it is easier to reject? i think the word consider should remain
avri doria: (08:56) i think defining the group as divergent is a fine suggestion
Steve DelBianco: (08:56) @Avri -- we need to make our Good Practices implementable practices. Such as Proposed Good Practice:An AC/SO/Group that elects its officers should impose term limits.
Steve DelBianco: (08:56) that is the case with all of our other Good Practices.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:56) that's the only remaining issue and we are done by the way. when this solved we can submit the report to ccwg right?
avri doria: (08:56) the rocess of consideration is something you implement
Farzaneh Badii: (08:57) great. we haveplenty of time 20 September! :)
avri doria: (08:57) i am not taking sides. more marvelling at a strnage discussion.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:58) it's not lack of progress
Farzaneh Badii: (08:58) everything is done . just this remianing issue which will be resolved too
Steve DelBianco: (08:59) yes
Alan Greenberg: (09:00) I am late for two other meetings. Good luck here.
Farzaneh Badii: (09:00) ok ... well solved.
Farzaneh Badii: (09:01) it's fine. it will settle.
Bernard Turcotte- ICANN: (09:02) bye all
Farzaneh Badii: (09:02) bye