RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION REQUESTED: Task 2 Outreach Document for Review

[Claudio Di Gangi <cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>]

Congratulations to the subgroup for producing this document. I will try to make 
the call on Friday, but may not be able to join due to a reoccurring conflict 
at that time.

While I think there some good ideas in this paper, I have concerns with forming 
another committee as a "centralized authority in the GNSO" (page 4), especially 
one chosen solely by the Board Public Participation Committee (page 5). 
Instead, my recommendation is that enhanced outreach efforts should build on 
what constituencies and stakeholder groups are already doing and channel 
outreach efforts through those groups to a considerable degree.  If such a 
committee is to be formed as part of the effort, it should be 
recruited/selected at the GNSO level and should have a finite life span (sunset 
date) unless extended.

The first goal of this effort should be to establish a baseline of what 
outreach efforts are currently being undertaken.  Otherwise, duplication and a 
lack of coordination are inevitable.

For instance see page 3 with reference to IGF attendance statistics.  What are 
the comparable statistics for ICANN?

A number of the proposals seem to be about ICANN outreach generally and are not 
focused on the GNSO.  See, for example, the discussion of universities at the 
bottom of page 3.  See also bottom of page 8 (how does inviting entities to 
events further outreach if those entities are not even "GNSO stakeholders"?).

Can the subgroup clarify what is the justification for additional outreach 
efforts to GNSO registries and registrars?  If these entities do not already 
understand the strong economic incentives for participation in the organization 
that makes their businesses possible (through accreditation of registrars, 
delegation to registries), then further outreach efforts will be fruitless.

The proposal does not recognize that engaging new players through an outreach 
effort will be pointless and counter-productive unless those players can have 
some confidence that, if they participate, their voices will be heard.  In 
other words, the committee's focus should be on outreach and empowerment, not 
outreach alone.  (In this regard, an effective contract compliance program, in 
which the complaints of non-contracted parties are promptly and effectively 
acted upon, will be an important element of any outreach strategy.)

Finally, as I understand the current climate of fiscal austerity within ICANN, 
it would be helpful for proposals for increased resources for outreach to be 
matched with proposals for which programs should receive reduced resources.

claudio


From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 3:24 PM
To: Olga Cavalli; OSC-CSG Work Team
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION REQUESTED: Task 2 Outreach Document for 
Review

My compliments to the sub-group for all the work.  My comments, questions and 
possible edits are highlighted in the attached file.  Warning: there are a lot 
of them, but please don't take that in a critical way.  I simply shared all the 
thoughts that came to mind as I reviewed the document as a new comer.  It may 
be in some cases that I misread the intent or did not understand the rationale 
behind the recommendations.

I will be happy to discuss my input with the sub-group and/or the full WT, but 
I may not be able to make the call this coming Friday or the following Friday.  
On 27 August I will be in Tokyo for an ICANN Registry/Registrar regional 
meeting.  On 2 September I will be on vacation.

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 5:13 PM
To: OSC-CSG Work Team
Subject: Fwd: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION REQUESTED: Task 2 Outreach Document for 
Review

Thanks Julie!
Please note that this document is for full Work Team Review!!!
Ideally we should agree in a final text next Friday and then we can send it to 
the OSC.
Comments are welcome.
Best regards
Olga
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: 2010/8/23
Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION REQUESTED: Task 2 Outreach Document for Review
To: gnso-osc-csg <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Dear Work Team members,

At our sub-team meeting last Friday, the Work Team asked me to edit the latest 
version of the draft Task 2 working document to clean it up and prepare it for 
review by the full Work Team.

Your action is requested: The attached draft Task 2 Working Document is ready 
for your review.  Please send comments to the list or, if you have specific 
edits, please include them as tracked edits and send them to me no later than  
1900 UTC/1200 PDT/1500 EDT on Thursday, 26 August, so that I may incorporate 
them into a revised document for discussion at our regular meeting on Friday, 
27 August at 1300 UTC.

Please note:  The document is now being discussed at the full Work Team level 
so we urge you to comment on the document and to attend Friday's meeting.  The 
document also has been posted to the wiki page at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions.

Best regards,

Julie