Re: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

by using vague and imprecise language, i hope to add to my mystique.  :-)

sorry — you’re right.  i really intended both meanings with that word.  can you 
and Avri carry that message for me?

mikey


On Feb 21, 2014, at 11:14 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Mikey, in your second paragraph, you use the expression "well-supported". Do 
> you mean supported as in "rah, rah, we want it", or "well-funded". If the 
> latter, you should be more explicit.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 21/02/2014 10:33 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>> hi again — this is a slightly newer new version.  i decided to break up the 
>> paragraph a little bit, that’s all.  here’s the way i did it 
>> 
>> The ATRT2 report documents how a very small group of dedicated volunteers 
>> carry an extraordinary proportion of the working-group load and correctly 
>> identifies this as a major concern.  We note that simply increasing the pool 
>> of people aware of and in some way engaged with ICANN should not be viewed 
>> as the goal.  Ultimately what is needed is a larger and more diverse group 
>> of active and effective volunteer participants in PDP working groups.  
>> 
>> Although outreach is an important part of the effort and crucial for 
>> bringing new volunteers to ICANN, the path to this goal should not end at 
>> simply recruiting a large diverse group of people.  Rather, there needs to 
>> be a clear and well-supported progression for community volunteers to gain 
>> the skills, knowledge and experience needed to broaden the ranks of active 
>> PDP participants and leaders.  
>> 
>> We support reversing the current trend of too little focus on the 
>> recruiting, development and support of capable volunteer policymakers while 
>> increasingly following the expedient path of hiring expert panels, expanding 
>> staff and hand-picking “community representatives” through opaque “selection 
>> committees.”
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Mike O'Connor <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> hi all, 
>>> 
>>> thanks for the comments.  here’s a new version.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The ATRT2 report documents how a very small group of dedicated volunteers 
>>> carry an extraordinary proportion of the working-group load and correctly 
>>> identifies this as a major concern.  We note that simply increasing the 
>>> pool of people aware of and in some way engaged with ICANN should not be 
>>> viewed as the goal.  Ultimately what is needed is a larger and more diverse 
>>> group of active and effective volunteer participants in PDP working groups. 
>>>  Although outreach is an important part of the effort and crucial for 
>>> bringing new volunteers to ICANN, the path to this goal should not end at 
>>> simply recruiting a large diverse group of people.  Rather, there needs to 
>>> be a clear and well-supported progression for community volunteers to gain 
>>> the skills, knowledge and experience needed to broaden the ranks of active 
>>> PDP participants and leaders.  We support reversing the current trend of 
>>> too little focus on the recruiting, development and support of capable 
>>> volunteer policymakers while increasingly following the expedient path of 
>>> hiring expert panels, expanding staff and hand-picking “community 
>>> representatives” through opaque “selection committees.”
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <ATRT2 - Draft Council Input (14 February 2014) MO2.doc> 
>>> 
>>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 8:54 AM, Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> +1
>>>> 
>>>> Thomas
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Am 21.02.2014 um 15:48 schrieb "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>> 
>>>>> I also support Mikey’s edits, but to Klaus’ point, I’m wondering if we 
>>>>> can insert something emphasizing that new participants be “volunteers”?   
>>>>>  We do not want to encourage the trend of hiring outside experts, 
>>>>> proliferating Staff, and hand-picked participants chosen by an opaque 
>>>>> “selection committee.”
>>>>> 
>>>>> J.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Klaus Stoll <kdrstoll@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Date: Friday, February 21, 2014 at 8:02 
>>>>> To: "Reed, Daniel A" <dan-reed@xxxxxxxxx>, Mike O'Connor 
>>>>> <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>, GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
>>>>> Subject: Re: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team 
>>>>> (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fine with me as long as we don't start breading more "experts".
>>>>> 
>>>>> Klaus
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 2/21/2014 2:46 PM, Reed, Daniel A wrote:
>>>>>> I think this is fine.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [ 
>>>>>> mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 7:04 AM
>>>>>> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency Review 
>>>>>> Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> hi all, 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> i agree Maria.  i had a go at adding another paragraph to our response 
>>>>>> to Rec #10.3 and have attached the revised draft.  but to save you time, 
>>>>>> here’s the language i inserted 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "The ATRT2 report documents how a very small group of dedicated 
>>>>>> volunteers carry an extraordinary proportion of the working-group load 
>>>>>> and correctly identifies this as a major concern.  We note that simply 
>>>>>> increasing the pool of people aware of and in some way engaged with 
>>>>>> ICANN should not be viewed as the goal.  Ultimately what is needed is a 
>>>>>> larger and more diverse group of active and effective participants in 
>>>>>> PDP working groups.  Although outreach is an important part of the 
>>>>>> effort and crucial for bringing newcomers to ICANN, the path to this 
>>>>>> goal should not end at simply recruiting a large diverse group of 
>>>>>> people.  Rather, there needs to be a clear and well-supported 
>>>>>> progression for newcomers to gain the skills, knowledge and experience 
>>>>>> needed to broaden the ranks of active PDP participants and leaders.”
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> happy to consider revisions.
>>>>>> mikey
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 3:56 AM, Maria Farrell <maria.farrell@xxxxxxxxx > 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>>>> I'm happy to support this, and thank you for drafting it. There's one 
>>>>>> small typo, track changes version attached. It's in para 1, page 3.
>>>>>> I'd have liked if we tackled head-on the issue of the narrowness of some 
>>>>>> PDP WGs' participation, which the ATRT2 report provided some pretty 
>>>>>> convincing numbers on. But as I haven't gone to the trouble of actually 
>>>>>> drafting anything on it, I can't complain. 
>>>>>> All the best, Maria
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> On 21 February 2014 09:15, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As a member of the ATRT2, I do not believe it my job to comment on our 
>>>>>> report.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think the GNSO response is fine as far as it goes and I am pleased 
>>>>>> that at least something is being submitted - though I must admit I am 
>>>>>> less than enthused about responses that essentially say "we are already 
>>>>>> doing that".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I might have wished for it to be more supportive of other aspects of the 
>>>>>> report, but the response is what it is.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> avri
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 21-Feb-14 09:43, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
>>>>>> *_PLEASE RESPOND WITHIN 8 HOURS_*
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> *From:*Jonathan Robinson [ mailto:jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>>>> *Sent:* 20 February 2014 09:38
>>>>>> *To:* council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2) Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The deadline for submission of public comment on the ends approximately
>>>>>> 36 hours from now.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am OK to submit a letter in substantially the same for as that
>>>>>> distributed to you on 14 Feb (see below) and re-attached to this letter.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> BUT
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I need your support to do so.  Accordingly, even if you simply provide
>>>>>> support without any comment on the content, that will be helpful.
>>>>>> *_PLEASE RESPOND WITHIN 24 HOURS_*
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thank-you.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> *From:*Jonathan Robinson [ mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>>>> *Sent:* 14 February 2014 17:21
>>>>>> *To:* council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx < mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT 2)
>>>>>> Final Report & Recommendations
>>>>>> *Importance:* High 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you are not already, please be aware of the following:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/atrt2-recommendations-09jan14-en.htm
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> The opportunity to provide comments _ends one week from today 23h59 UTC
>>>>>> on 21 Feb 2014_. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The ATRT2 interacted with many in the community during the course of its
>>>>>> work, including directly with the GNSO Council which was certainly
>>>>>> appreciated.  We now have an opportunity to comment on the final report.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If we do intend to comment, my opinion is that we should at least submit
>>>>>> an indication of intent, if not the primary comment, in the initial
>>>>>> comment period and not wait for the reply period.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Given the tight time frame, I have taken the unusual step of drafting a
>>>>>> council response for your consideration.  The ATRT2 deals with some
>>>>>> critical areas of GNSO work and function and so it seems to me that we
>>>>>> should respond to the call for comments, specifically in so far as the
>>>>>> report deals with GNSO Policy and directly related areas.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am aware that some of you were on the ATRT2 and others actively worked
>>>>>> on Council interaction with the ATRT2.  Therefore, you may well have
>>>>>> strong views on the subject matter.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I look forward to your input and any suggestions.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> <ATRT2 - Draft Council Input (14 February 2014).doc>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: 
>>>>>> OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
>>>>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: 
>>> OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) 
>> 
>> 
>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: 
>> OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) 
>> 


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP 
(ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)