[gnso-ccwg-dt] CCWG-DT 27 Oct Dakar Meeting Chat Transcript

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear CCWG-DT members,

Below is the transcript from the chat room from today’s public session of the 
CCWG-DT.

Best regards,

Julie

Cross-Community Working Group Drafting Team Public Session, 27 October 2011, 
Dakar, Senegal — Adobe Connect Chat Room Transcript

Liz Gasster:we will begin momentarily
Liz Gasster:We are now beginning
Liz Gasster:@ Lseufer -- if youwould like to speak at all you will need to dial 
in to the call as well
Lseufer:thanks Liz, will do if I need to
Liz Gasster:great
Sivasubramanian M:who is speaking please?
Liz Gasster:Edmon Chung, .Asia
Sivasubramanian M:Thanks  Liz
Sivasubramanian M:Question: Why is this peculiar limitation on Cross Community 
Working Groups - that they are not to be used to develop new consensus policy?  
Cross Community Groups are and excellent way of discussing issues all across 
ICANN, so why not make these groups more purposeful?
Sivasubramanian M:Please read out this question
Liz Gasster:today there is no "joint" PDP process, for gTLD in Annex A, and is 
a different process than for ccNSO, annex b, so if the purpose of the group is 
to explore areas or provide general advice, there is no current restriction, 
but if it is actual PDP, must be one or the other
Liz Gasster:sure
Sivasubramanian M:Thanks Liz for your clarification, which is informative and 
for reading out this question, in addition
Sivasubramanian M:@
Liz Gasster:Alan Greenberg, ALAC liaison to GNSO, is speaking now
Sivasubramanian M:@ ALan on Rules :  Why not create cross-community rules for 
cross-community working groups, rather than wonder whether to go by the rules 
of one house or another?
Liz Gasster:I will ask that Q too, but that could be an outcome of this group
Sivasubramanian M:@Liz..  It would be great if there is such an outcome,  but 
still please pose this question, as the focus as of now seems to be on 
constraints rather than on arriving at a solution
Sivasubramanian M:Thanks Liz :) and to the Chair
Sivasubramanian M:Comment, left on the chat window, not necessarily to be read 
out:  @Alan  It would be be progressive to approach the idea of cross-community 
rules without prejudice, without pre-formed apprehensions that it would turn 
out to be like a "Dog's breakfast" ( if that is what you said )
Jamie Wagner:sorry guys I got very sick and could not leave the room
Edmon:o... hope you would get well soon... get some rest :-)
Jamie Wagner:there are some issues to be discussed on this group pertaining 
mainly to chartering by multiple SOs or ACs
Jamie Wagner:what happens in the event of different charters? how to overcome 
potential conflicts?
Edmon:maybe we should avoid different charters :-P
Liz Gasster:Chuck Gomes, Verisign, speaking now
Jamie Wagner:think the main resistances to the idea of CCWGs come from GNSO 
itself and other parts of the community are more flexible in their
>approach to this issue
Sivasubramanian M:One solution out of all this is to leave house proceudres and 
house rules to the houses, and come up with a set of "ICANN WG rules and 
procedures" to apply to cross-community working groups. A draft can be 
prepeared and adopted for one or two working groups, and amended as we go
Jamie Wagner:+1 to Chuck's point
Carlos Dionisio Aguirre:+1
Mary Wong:Providing advice directly to the Board may be problematic; it can be 
viewed as a run-around each SO/AC's internal processes. While direct advice to 
the Board may be justified in certain circumstances (e.g. if a Board resolution 
directs the group be formed and it's clear the group has to report back to it) 
the normal course should be reports to the SO/ACs and generally to the 
community.
Mary Wong:Or unless the SO/ACs agree and understand direct advice is the route 
to go.
Alan Greenberg:Regarding who CWGs report to, the JAS recommended that there be 
a joint Board/AC/So group formed to look at foundations. So let's just keep it 
simple and say repory to the chartering orgs.
Mary Wong:Thanks, Jonathan, team, staff and everyone.
Liz Gasster:this session has concluded
Jamie Wagner:bye