[council] Re: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Jennifer, Phil and Donna for weighing in.

Perhaps the concern is that we’ve called this document a “draft” but it too 
closely resembles a finished policy.  I believe (and I think Jennifer’s note 
confirms) that this was intended to start a dialogue in whatever subsequent 
group addresses this work, and a mechanism for relaying GNSO ideas, questions 
and concerns in to that effort.

I appreciate the discussion, and hope that we can all get to a place where 
we’re either comfortable with the draft, or we amend it, or substitute it with 
something else.

Thanks—


From: Jennifer Standiford <JStandiford@xxxxxxx<mailto:JStandiford@xxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 12:46
To: "Austin, Donna" 
<Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, Phil Corwin 
<psc@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, James Bladel 
<jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, GNSO Council List 
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment 
Policy

Hi Phil and Colleagues,

Just a friendly reminder the attached document that was put forth in the GNSO 
Letter to Akram was referred to as a draft. James also included several 
questions that remain unanswered that will need to be address in addition to 
the points that you and Donna have raised.  As for Donna’s specific question, I 
would anticipate that ICANN Conference Participants would be a defined term 
that would include all ICANN staff and board members.

Jennifer

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:36 PM
To: Phil Corwin; James M. Bladel; GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN 
Harassment Policy

Hi Phil

It’s a good point and also raises another one for me. Are Dr Crocker and the 
other Board members covered under the ICANN staff policy on Sexual Harassment 
or would they be covered under a community ICANN attendee policy?

Donna

From:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin
Sent: Wednesday, 6 April 2016 9:33 AM
To: James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>>; GNSO 
Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN 
Harassment Policy

Thinking about this a bit more – how would this incident be treated under any 
proposed Harassment Policy?

http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches-with-risky-caitlyn-jenner-joke<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__domainincite.com_18772-2Dicann-2D53-2Dlaunches-2Dwith-2Drisky-2Dcaitlyn-2Djenner-2Djoke&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=h3XcnXqB85gfZ3Y7DZ8az_JrLeKiCfPqWb4lAHQf4_w&e=>

Some found it offensive, and an apology was issued by Chairman Crocker. Is that 
sufficient or would reporting and investigation be required?



Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/Cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

From: Phil Corwin
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 12:07 PM
To: 'James M. Bladel'; GNSO Council List
Subject: RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN Harassment 
Policy

Colleagues:

I support in principle sending a letter to Akram on this subject and 
establishing clearer, enforceable policies regarding sexual and other forms of 
harassment that may take place at ICANN meetings.

However, while I am strongly opposed to any form of such harassment, I have 
some concerns about the proposed draft Harassment Policy, relating to:

·         This very extensive list of potential offenses being non-exclusive 
(indicated by the words “At a minimum” that start the document)

·         The use of the modifier “Offensive” at the start of sections 1-4, in 
that this subjective standard inevitably raises the question “offensive to 
whom”? In this regard, I think there must be some element of intent to harass 
or demean in the behavior subject to sanction, and that any policy should 
recognize that the cultural diversity of ICANN meeting attendees may lead to 
situations where remarks that are not intended to offend may nonetheless do so.

·         A need to strictly define, and limit, the “prompt, appropriate 
remedial action” that ICANN staff may take if they determine that harassment 
has occurred (as well as whether ICANN staff are the appropriate parties to 
undertake such investigations, and whether the investigatory and 
judgmental/sanctioning roles should be separate).

·         Contradictory language regarding whether an individual who believes 
that he/she has witnessed harassment should report it, or must report it.

I look forward to engaging in a discussion of these matters on our call of 
April 14th.

Best regards, Philip


Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/Cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

From:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 7:46 PM
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re: ICANN 
Harassment Policy

Council Colleagues —

Attached and copied below, please find a draft letter from the Council to Akram 
Atallah, in response to his recent blog post (“Conduct at ICANN Meetings” 
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blog_conduct-2Dat-2DICANN-2Dmeetings&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=2bT0nSpiH1q_-tgjleaUvWdNq2u6d8arN9tI0S9B0VU&e=>).

In this note, I set out to make some high-level points that support further 
work in this area, without weighing in on any specific indecent.  Also, the 
letter references a statement from the NCUC ExCom (“Statement from NCUC 
Executive Committee” 
http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.ncuc.org_pipermail_ncuc-2Ddiscuss_2016-2DMarch_018488.html&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=8hUYalyHSVt4n-N7pswf04QMWd3qMc5hEdlArbgm240&e=>)
 and the ICANN Harassment Policy drafted by our volunteers (attached), and 
urges any future effort to consider these materials.

If possible, please review these documents prior to our next call on 14 APR.  
We can collect edits and then decide if/how we want to proceed.

Thank you,

J.


________________________________

Akram Atallah
COO and interim CEO, ICANN

Dear Akram –

On behalf of the GNSO Council, we would like to thank your for your recent blog 
post (“Conduct at ICANN Meetings”).  Members of the Council, and all of the 
GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, share the goal of ensuring that all 
members of the community can participate in and contribute to ICANN, in an 
environment where harassment and discrimination are not tolerated.

Without passing judgment on any specific incident, we are encouraged by the 
commitment from Staff and the Board to engage the community on this subject.
In support of this, volunteers on the Council have prepared a draft (“ICANN 
Conference Harassment Policy”, attached). Several questions remain open, 
however, including:


?         Whether this Policy would enhance, or be distinct from, the existing 
Expected Standards of Behavior policy

?         Whether complaints would be reported to ICANN Staff, or the Office of 
the Ombudsman, or some other entity or group

?         How the policy will be enforced, and

?         Other topics and questions that will arise from this work.

We expect that members of the GNSO community will be engaged in this effort, 
and note that some have already undertaken work in their own groups (“Statement 
from NUCU Executive Committee”).  We urge this group to consider these 
materials in any community undertaking to develop new policy addressing this 
issue.

Thank you


Donna Austin, GNSO Vice-Chair
James Bladel, GNSO Chair
Heather Forrest, GNSO Vice-Chair


https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blog_conduct-2Dat-2Dicann-2Dmeetings&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=kieUDRl76GvEhQPJxetsJ4aez7X5o2Vea2-dIT5x-Uc&e=>



http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.ncuc.org_pipermail_ncuc-2Ddiscuss_2016-2DMarch_018488.html&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=8hUYalyHSVt4n-N7pswf04QMWd3qMc5hEdlArbgm240&e=>



________________________________
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - 
www.avg.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.avg.com&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&s=Wc6g-4Lo0XrpvCus6DBuVDgfsaHZUFkJkS6hjLLPAak&e=>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11942 - Release Date: 04/02/16