Re: [council] Final Working Group Work Team Report & Motion

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Jeff.

That being the case, I would like to propose an amendment to your motion.

I would propose that a 3rd resolved clause be added stating the following:

RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council recommends that a one-page summary of 
the WG Guidelines be drafted by ICANN Staff in order to serve as a primer to 
the full document  for potential WG members. The one-page summary should be 
approved by the PPSC before being submitted to the GNSO Council.

I hope you can consider this amendment friendly.

Thanks,

Stéphane

Le 10 janv. 2011 à 17:32, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :

> Stephane,
>  
> I think you have some good points and I completely understand the notion of 
> having too much to read for what seems like fairly simple concepts.  The PPSC 
> did not discuss this issue and I am not sure to what extent the WG-WT 
> discussed. 
>  
> However, I believe that once the principles are approved by the Council, that 
> we (the Council) can direct the staff to draft up a shorter summary (with 
> encouragement to read the full report).  I suppose the PPSC could review the 
> summary to make sure it is in line with the final report.  We could also when 
> it comes time to approve the principles in our motion direct that staff hold 
> a short session at the start of every Working Group to educate Working Group 
> members on the basics for those interested.
>  
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Best regards,
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or 
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have 
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, 
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
> the original message.
>  
>  
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 10:17 AM
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: 'GNSO Council'
> Subject: Re: [council] Final Working Group Work Team Report & Motion
>  
> Hi Jeff,
>  
> Because these WG guidelines are intended for use by WG members (see 1.3) I 
> find it surprising that they would be expected to read a 35 page document in 
> order to get a grasp on the way ICANN recommends they should set-up and run 
> their WG.
>  
> I do not find it realistic to expect volunteer members of a WG, not all of 
> which would necessarily be very clued on up ICANN processes (nor should we 
> expect them to be if we are to encourage broader community participation), to 
> have to tackle such a report. As such, I fear that what we will end up seeing 
> happening is that people do not read these guidelines and do not profit from 
> them.
>  
> With regards to this, has the idea of producing a one-page summary of the 
> guidelines been discussed by the PPSC at all? The idea would be to have some 
> kind of WG guideline "primer" which could help people understand what is 
> expected of them as part of a GNSO WG.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 2 janv. 2011 à 03:53, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :
> 
> 
> All,
>  
> Please find enclosed the Final Working Group Work Team report as approved by 
> the Policy Process Steering Committee.   I am also attaching for the 
> Council’s review a redline of the report that compares the Final to the 
> Interim Report that came out prior to the Brussels meeting.  The changes 
> reflect public comments to the Interim report plus changes made as a result 
> of questions raised by the PPSC as addressed by the Working Group Work Team.  
> All of the constituencies/Stakeholder Groups represented on the PPSC approved 
> the final report with the exception of the Business Constituency, who did not 
> vote.   The ALAC representative, who does not officially get a vote, also 
> expressed his approval of the report.
>  
> A non-official informal poll was taken within the PPSC as to whether we 
> should recommend to the Council that it put the final report out for public 
> comment before review/approval given the changes that have been made since 
> the last time the report was out for comment.  The Registries, IPC and ISP 
> representatives believe the GNSO Council should place the report out for 
> comment; the Registrars did not think it was necessary, but did not object; 
> the BC did not vote; and the NCSG opposed making this recommendation to the 
> Council (believing that the Council should decide for itself what it wanted 
> to do).
>  
> The motion I present below acknowledges receipt of report and requests that 
> the report go out for comment (should the council elect to put it out for 
> comment).
>  
> I would be happy to answer any questions.
>  
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  
> Motion to Acknowledge the Receipt of the GNSO Working Group Guidelines and 
> Initiate a Public Comment Period
>  
> WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see GNSO 
> Council Improvements Implementation Plan; 
> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-implementation-plan-16oct08.pdf)
>  for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved by 
> the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008 
> (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182 
> <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm>);
>  
> WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two 
> Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and thePolicy 
> Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the efforts of 
> five community work teams in developing specific recommendations to implement 
> the improvements;
>  
> WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Working Group 
> Work Team (WG WT), which was chartered to develop a new GNSO Working Group 
> Model that improves inclusiveness, improves effectiveness, and improves 
> efficiency;
>  
> WHEREAS, the WG WT completed its deliberations and forwarded the GNSO Working 
> Group Guidelines to the PPSC on 1 November 2010;
>  
> WHEREAS, the PPSC reviewed and approved the GNSO Working Group Guidelines on 
> 20 December 2010 [includelink to GNSO Working Group Guidelines once posted]
> and forwarded the report to the GNSO Council on 30 December 2010;
>  
> NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
>  
> RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the GNSO Working Group 
> Guidelines as delivered by the PPSC and directs ICANN Staff to commence a 
> twenty-one (21) day public comment period on the GNSO Working Group 
> Guidelines.
>  
> RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the GNSO Working 
> Group Guidelines as soon as possible after the end of the public comment 
> period.
>  
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
> Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
> jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx  / www.neustar.biz     
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or 
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have 
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, 
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
> the original message.
>  
> <GNSO WG Guidelines - FINAL - 10 December 
> 2010.pdf><GNSO_WG_Guideline_Revised_Final_Redline_10 December 2010.doc>
>