Re: [council] For your review - draft Council responses to CCWG Accountability survey
As mentioned on today’s call, please find attached a slightly modified version which aims to address the comments raised by Heather. Please indicate by Friday 16 December at 13.00 UTC at the latest if you have any concerns about these modifications. Following that, absent any comments, this response will be submitted to the CCWG-Accountability chairs. Best regards, Marika From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 12:02 PM To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: FW: [council] For your review - draft Council responses to CCWG Accountability survey Reminder – please provide any comments / edits you may have by Friday 9 December COB. As discussed on the Council call, the objective is to send the response to the CCWG-Accountability Chairs early next week. Thanks, Marika From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thursday, December 1, 2016 at 12:51 PM To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [council] For your review - draft Council responses to CCWG Accountability survey Dear All, In preparation for item 9 – GNSO Council Response to Questions from the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs concerning Work Strems (see further details below), please find attached a draft GNSO Council response for your review. Note that this draft only focuses on the GNSO Council aspects as it is the expectation that GNSO Stakeholder Groups and/or Constituencies will provide their respective responses to the survey. Best regards, Marika Item 9. COUNCIL DISCUSSION – GNSO Council Response to Questions from the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs concerning Work Stream 2 (10 minutes) On 4 November 2016, the co-chairs of the Cross Community Working Group on ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) wrote to all SO/AC leaders seeking input by early December on the resources and documents used by each SO/AC to maintain accountability to its respective designated community, taking into account the particular or specific working modalities of each SO/AC (and any subgroups) (https://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg19440.html)[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_mailing-2Dlists_archives_council_msg19440.html-29&d=DgMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=FOLHRkyP1CJilEE0xYQhJllo1ue6MlXmKJPFl3FO5U8&s=mR_wcp_sCCm1zlfn_Br4l10pr58ZXz409FXmaDqq9NM&e=>. The GNSO Council leadership is working on a possible response from the Council, and has requested feedback from each Stakeholder Group and Constituency on the topic. Here the Council will discuss whether or not to send a response to the CCWG-Accountability co-chairs. 9.1 – Status summary (GNSO Council leadership) 9.2 – Council discussion 9.3 – Next steps Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DgMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=JUvsp0pqnW9xOqR38YYmnXEb0KD5k5FiQ8shx129XC0&s=rP4BrSv7CU5Vd1xKAOoQqCJ2X_JCKhl5K2ECaKG6ot0&e=> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=JUvsp0pqnW9xOqR38YYmnXEb0KD5k5FiQ8shx129XC0&s=CXYi0k_WafO7X6sRnKi7gwU1nNb6mYhKkqa-kRaPbE8&e=>.
SO AC questions - draft GNSO Council responses - upd 14 December 2016.docx