ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

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


Council Members,

I do appreciate and acknowledge that the GNSO council is not by any means an 
expert in the creation of a Harassment Policy nor is this considered part of 
our role. However, we, as council members, do represent and speak on behalf of 
our SG members that have been subjected to harassment. With that being said, I 
believe the current ‘Cover Letter’ should be sent to Akram with the removal of 
the Key Points attachment and any references to it.

Thank you,
Jennifer




On 4/19/16, 19:46 , "owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of 
Heather<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.orgonbehalfofHeatherForrest>

Forrest"<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.orgonbehalfofHeatherForrest> 
<owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf 
of<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.orgonbehalfofHeather.Forrest@xxxxxxxxxx>

Heather.Forrest@xxxxxxxxxx><mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.orgonbehalfofHeather.Forrest@xxxxxxxxxx>
 wrote:



I am grateful for the work to date of the small team and do not in any

way wish to downplay their efforts, but I too agree with Paul - very well

put.



Best wishes,



Heather



________________________________________

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
<owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on

behalf of Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 9:46

To: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G.; 
policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Cc: Stephanie Perrin; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: RE: [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:

ICANN Harassment Policy



There has been some discussion of harassment policy within the BC, and

the prevailing view is that a draft policy is best developed by legal

experts in this sensitive area and then put out for public comment prior

to finalization and adoption.



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





-----Original Message-----

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Behalf Of Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G.

Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:45 PM

To: policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Cc: Stephanie Perrin; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: Re: [council] For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:

ICANN Harassment Policy





I want to restate my +1 to Paul´s comments very specifically on the way

he has phrased some issues questions



I guess I have my doubts in general about this being the role of the

GNSO Council.

me too



Clearly, this is an important issue which affects all members of the

ICANN community, and not just members of the GNSO.

exactly



Wouldn't a simple letter (1) making note of the event, (2) making note

of the lack of a clear policy, and (3) asking the Board to launch a

CCWG to address this issue (if the Board believes that it and Staff

together cannot or should not for some reason), be sufficient?  I just

don't see how the Council should be in the business of making specific

policy recommendations without a policy process.

see under ³picket fence²



The Council is not a legislative body - our role is to play traffic

cop to grass roots movements, right?

thats the way I see it and why I added my +1

Thanks, and sorry if I am missing something here!

I miss clear guidelines from the Corporation on engagement rules for

participants in f2f meetings (like the ones we have in adobe connect

rooms).



Carlos Raul Gutierrez





Best,

Paul







-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Fwd: Re: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram

Atallah re: ICANN Harassment Policy

From: Stephanie Perrin

<[stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxx<mailto:[stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)>

ronto.ca)><mailto:[stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)>

Date: Wed, April 06, 2016 1:31 pm

To: 
"[council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)"<mailto:[council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)><[council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)><mailto:[council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)>







and one more time....

SP



-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:

Re: [council] RE: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:

ICANN Harassment Policy

Date:

Wed, 6 Apr 2016 16:28:01 -0400

From:

Stephanie Perrin

[<stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>](mailto:stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxx

ronto.ca)

To:

Jennifer Gore Standiford

[<JStandiford@xxxxxxx><mailto:JStandiford@xxxxxxx>](mailto:JStandiford@xxxxxxx),
 James M. Bladel

[<jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>](mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx),
 Austin, Donna

[<Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>](mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx),
 Phil

Corwin [<psc@xxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>](mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx), 
GNSO Council List

[<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)



I am sorry to be late with my feedback.  This is a great effort so

far, but I must say I find it a wee bit over the top.  Let me explain

why:



  * The list of offensive (inappropriate of unwanted) conduct is

exhaustive but not necessarily helpful.  "at a minimum" needs to go,

as Phil has pointed out.  The problem in harassment policies in my

view arises in the matter of how to determine "offensive" now

"inappropriate", particularly across cultures.  It would be more

helpful to expand on this, explaining the cross-cultural nature of

ICANN and give guidance on how to conduct oneself

_tentatively_.....eg. if you are Dutch and in the habit of greeting

people with three kisses, ask first.  I don't think we want to shut

down normal gestures of familiarity and affection, but maybe we

do....it is worth a discussion.  The other part that needs to go

unless you want us all to be tied into legal quandries is this: "or

any other category protected by any applicable governing law". What

are the laws of Finland on public deportment, discrimination, etc.

?  Where do we go next, how do I check the laws there?  I don't find

this helpful. If you are going to include language like this, we will

have to have the already burdened Constituency Travel send out

advisories:  eg.  When in Turkey, do not make jokes about Ataturk as

it is forbidden by law,  etc. etc.

  * There needs to be a section discussing the rights of the accused,

and their rights to confidentiality.  It is my view that we need a

privacy policy more than a harassment policy, because I feel that

inappropriate conduct is in fact already covered by our acceptable

conduct policy, but here we are anyway.  The accused has a right to

have investigations conducted properly, and in confidence in my view,

so how that is going to take place, who does them, when the accuser is

permitted to go public,etc. needs quite a bit of work.

  * "By participating in an ICANN conference, you agree to prohibit

harassment....."

I actually think we should not demand that anyone who agrees to

participate in an ICANN conference should have to agree to take on the

role of enforcer of a harassment policy.  Further on this:

  *        "You shall report any actions that you believe may violate

our policy no matter how slight the actions might seem".

This is not necessary.  Anyone who experiences harassment ought to be

capable of determining themselves whether there was abuse, let us not

invite people to interfere with other people's jokes unless those

jokes are offending them, the listener.  In other words, I take no

offence at Michele N calling me a crazy tree-hugger, and I really

don't want to be dragged into Chris Lahatte's office to discuss it

just because someone overheard it and felt I ought to be offended.

Now if they are offended, (eg. they are a tree-hugger and are offended

at the suggestion that I ought to be considered in that group) they

can make their own complaint and leave me out of it.  In a policy such

as this, one has to be quite careful about how wide one opens the

door.

However, thanks to all who worked on this, it is very difficult to

craft a good harassment policy and enforcement mechanism, and my hat

is off to you on efforts so far. I would also like to apologize to

anyone whom I have either touched or kissed hello over the three

years I have been attending ICANN.  I meant no harm, I spent too much

time in Montreal (where we kiss everybody only twice) and I will

strive to be more guarded in future.



I spent a year working in our central agency in the Canadian

Government, working on the ethics code and a limited time also on

evaluating workplace wellness (including harassment) policies and

implementation in the departments.  I like the Canadian approach, and

offer you the link here:

[](http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/index-eng.asp)[



http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/index-eng.asp](http:/<http://>

/www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/index-eng.asp).

In particular, the tools that help evaluate whether an act

constitutes harassment I think are useful:

[](http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/mibh-sjh-eng.as



p)[http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/mibh-sjh-eng.asp](

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/healthy-sain/prh/mibh-sjh-eng.asp).

They put an emphasis on the activity needing to be repeated, or one

action to be extreme...this may be more applicable in a workplace

environment but I think the tests are nevertheless relevant.



Cheers Stephanie Perrin



On 2016-04-06 15:00, Jennifer Gore Standiford wrote:

James and Colleagues,

Thanks to Donna and Phil for their constructive feedback. With that,

please review and provide any additional feedback based on  the

revised draft ŒICANN Conference Harassment ­ Key Points for

Consideration¹.



The attached addresses the following feedback received thus far,  in

particular:



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?

Included the following sentence: ŒThe term ³ICANN Conference

Attendees² includes event registered and non-registered participants,

sponsors, contractors, consultants, staff and board members.¹



This very extensive list of potential offenses being non-exclusive

(indicated by the words ³At a minimum² that start the document)

Removed term ³ At a minimum²



The use of the modifier ³Offensive² at the start of sections 1-4, in

that this subjective standard inevitably raises the question

³offensive to whom²? 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.

Replaced the word Œ offensive¹ with Œunwanted¹ or Œinappropriate¹



A need to strictly define, and limit, the ³prompt, appropriate

remedial action² 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).

Change verbiage to state ŒICANN staff is required toŠ¹ instead of

Œmay¹



Contradictory language regarding whether an individual who believes

that he/she has witnessed harassment should report it, or must report

it.

Change the verbiage to sake of consistency. Opted for Œshould/shall¹

vs. Œrequired/will¹



The outstanding questions that James has outline should remain

included in the GNSO letter to ensure each item is addressed.



Thanks

Jennifer





**From:** James M. Bladel

[[mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx)]

**Sent:** Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:57 PM

**To:** Jennifer Gore Standiford; Austin, Donna; Phil Corwin; GNSO

Council List

**Subject:** Re: For Discussion: GNSO Letter to Akram Atallah re:

ICANN Harassment Policy

Thanks Jennifer, Phil and Donna for weighing in.



Perhaps the concern is that we¹ve called this document a ³draft²

but it too closely resembles a finished policy.  I believe (and I

think Jennifer¹s 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 we¹re either comfortable with the draft, or we amend it, or

substitute it with something else.



Thanks‹





**From:** Jennifer Standiford

<[JStandiford@xxxxxxx](mailto:JStandiford@xxxxxxx)><mailto:[JStandiford@xxxxxxx](mailto:JStandiford@xxxxxxx)>

**Date:** Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 12:46

**To:** "Austin, Donna"

<[](<[](mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx)[Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailt<mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxx%3ca%20class=>

o:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx)><mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxx%3ca%20class=>, Phil 
Corwin

<[psc@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx)><mailto:[psc@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx)>,
 James Bladel

<[jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx)><mailto:[jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx)>,
 GNSO Council

List 
<[council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)><mailto:[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 Donna¹s 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)

[[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann

.org)]

**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



It¹s 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:**[](mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)[owner-council@xxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxx>

ann.org](mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)

[[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann

.org)]

**On Behalf Of** Phil Corwin

**Sent:** Wednesday, 6 April 2016 9:33 AM

**To:** James M. Bladel

<[](<[](mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx)[jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:jbladel@<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxx%3ca%20class=>

godaddy.com)><mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxx%3ca%20class=>;

GNSO Council List

<[council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)><mailto:[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)[http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches-with-risk

y-caitlyn-jenner-joke](http://domainincite.com/18772-icann-53-launches

-with-risky-caitlyn-jenner-joke)



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 ³At a minimum² that start the

document) ·         The use of the modifier ³Offensive² at the start

of sections 1-4, in that this subjective standard inevitably raises

the question ³offensive to whom²? 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 ³prompt,

appropriate remedial action² 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:**[](mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)[owner-council@xxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxx>

ann.org](mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)

[[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx](mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann

.org)]

**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 (³Conduct at

ICANN Meetings²



[](https://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings)[https://www

.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings](https://www.icann.org/new

s/blog/conduct-at-ICANN-meetings)).



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

(³Statement from NCUC Executive Committee²

[](http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html

)[http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html]

(http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html))

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 (³Conduct at ICANN Meetings²).  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

(³ICANN Conference Harassment Policy², 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 (³Statement from NUCU Executive Committee²).  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://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings<http://www.icann.org/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings>](https://www.icann.o

rg/news/blog/conduct-at-icann-meetings)



[](http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html

)[http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html]

(http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-March/018488.html)



* * *

No virus found in this message.

Checked by AVG -

[www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ww

w.avg.com&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr5

6eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=GTJBGbCRyivgpW19dk4dofA96i5L2FtmkxBrrkb_voc&

s=Wc6g-4Lo0XrpvCus6DBuVDgfsaHZUFkJkS6hjLLPAak&e=)

Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11942 - Release Date:

04/02/16

-----

No virus found in this message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>

Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/12005 - Release Date:

04/10/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date.







<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>