[gnso-policyimpl-wg] Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation WG meeting - 10 September 2014
Dear All, The next Policy and Implementation Working Group teleconference is scheduled next week on Wednesday 17 September at 19:00 UTC for 1 hour. Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working group call held on Wednesday 10 September 2014 at 19:00 UTC at: <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20140910-en.mp3> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20140910-en.mp3 On page: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#sep> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#sep The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Cheryl Langdon-Orr - At-Large Olevie Kouami - NPOC Greg Shatan-IPC J Scott Evans - BC Anne Aikman Scalese - IPC Tom Barrett - RrSG Chuck Gomes - RySG Avri Doria-NCSG Apologies: Stephanie Perrin - NCUC Alan Greenberg-ALAC ICANN staff: Mary Wong Amy Bivins Marika Konings Karen Lentz Berry Cobb Steve Chan Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: <https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag> https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew For GNSO Secretariat Adobe Chat Transcript for Wednesday 10 September Marika Konings:Welcome to the Policy & Implementation WG Meeting of 10 September 2014 tom barrett - EnCirca:i will be switching from adobe to the call Avri Doria:deferentiate between implementation and how implementation is done. Marika Konings:Charter question 3 says 'A framework for implementation related discussions associated with GNSO Policy Recommendations;' Mary Wong:Clarification - the current framework is a codification of what's been developed to date as implementation practices (including experiences with the few IRTs that we have had) and some questions/suggestions for this WG to consider in developing its recommendations. Mary Wong:ie we did not mean to give the impression that the proposed framework is something merely informational for this WG and unchangeable except by staff J. Scott:I am not sure it existed at the formation of this group Mary Wong:@J Scott, that is correct - if it had we would certainly have included it as one of the background documents for WG review and discussion! Terri Agnew:Olevie Kouami has joined audio Avri Doria:i forget, did we define bottom-up? Mary Wong:@Avri, the Working Definitions document has this for the term "Bottom Up in a GNSO PDP" Mary Wong:An organizational framework or structure for organizational governance or policymaking which aims to bring together all stakeholders affected by such governance or policymaking to cooperate and participate in the dialogue, decision making and implementation of solutions to identified problems or goals.The Multistakeholder Model adopted by ICANN, is composed of diverse self-selected Internet stakeholders from around the world organized or self-organized into various Supporting Organizations, Constituencies and Advisory Committees, and utilizes a bottom-up, consensus-based policy development processes, open to anyone willing to participate.A fundamental principle of ICANN's participation and policy development decision-making process whereby policy and organizational decisions and analysis progress from analysis to policy not from the Board down, but from stakeholders, Internet users, companies, and anyone who wishes to participate in the process up to the Board. The process provides the opportunity for equal Avri Doria:so in other words , this is raw material for us to talk about at this point? Anne Aikman-Scalese:My version of Objective 4. says "Provide a framework for implementation work that is predictable, consistent, efficient and timely and that includes appropriate multi-stakeholder feedback Mary Wong:Sorry, last sentence got cut off: ". The process provides the opportunity for equal participation from all levels from the involved organizations, as practical and possible." Mary Wong:@Anne, it may be a semantic difference but the Deliverables from the WG are actually "Recomemndations that are expected to provide a framework etc. etc." Marika Konings:@Anne - the charter says 'The Policy & Implementation Working Group is tasked to provide the GNSO Council with a set of recommendations on ..... A framework for implementation related discussions associated with GNSO Policy Recommendations' Avri Doria:right the definiton of bottomup process includes the undefined term bottom-up. - i though that is what i remembered. Mary Wong:@Avri, yes I believe so - and that was picked up again in the opening sections of the other document, on Working Principles, I believe. Avri Doria:and if we recommend it be changed? Mary Wong:@Avri, IIRC that may also be why the term is specifically conditined to "bottom up in a GNSO PDP" for the Definitions. Avri Doria:yep Mary Wong:@Avri, yes - descriptive of what is already being done Marika Konings:@Avri - correct Cheryl Langdon-Orr:that is what I understand @avri Karen Lentz:correct Mary Wong:Yes - so, e.g. if the WG in reviewing this descriptive doc finds gaps, it can identify them and perhaps suggest how they can be improved/addressed. Cheryl Langdon-Orr:figured that was the point of us having this chat Mary Wong:These are some Working Principles this WG agreed on that may be helpful here: Mary Wong:3. Implementation should be regarded as an integral and continuing part of the process rather than an administrative follow-on, and should be seen as a process that allows for dialogue and collaboration between those implementing the policy and those that developed it and/or are affected by the implementation. 4. Whilst implementation processes as such need not always function in a purely bottom-up manner, in all cases the relevant policy development body (e.g., the chartering organization) must have the opportunity to be involved during implementation, to provide guidance on the implementation of the policies as recommended by the GNSO]. Amy Bivins:noted, Avri--I will add that Cheryl Langdon-Orr:good catch /avri Karen Lentz:agreed - accountability is mentioned elsewhere but should be up top Marika Konings:Don't worry, we will ;-) Avri Doria:i agree on the imporantce of disagreement Karen Lentz:thanks Chuck - that is our intention Mary Wong:An IRT is currently not mandatory, but the GNSO Council has increasingly requested that one be used, recently. Anne Aikman-Scalese:Is it Implementation Review or Implementation Recommendation and why the change in terms? Amy Bivins:Ann, that was a typo, I'll change it in the document Amy Bivins:Sorry, Anne :) Anne Aikman-Scalese:I have a 1 pm conference call. Can we please end on time? Anne Aikman-Scalese:IF PDP says Implementation Review TEam and this just reflects currrent practice, why does this doc say "Implementation Recommendation Team"? Amy Bivins:Anne--see above, that was a typo and will be corrected Anne Aikman-Scalese:Thanks Amy.. Sorrry but I must drop off the call. This stuff is important - hope we can take it up again next week. Anne Aikman-Scalese:Bye all. Avri Doria:currently the method of rasing the intent varaince flag is twitter and glogs. Avri Doria:blogs, though glog is nice too. Marika Konings::-) Cheryl Langdon-Orr:we kicked off a few mi s late Chu/k. so were doing OK Cheryl Langdon-Orr:terri. note. I am in hotel all next week for dial outs. will advise details after check in Karen Lentz:thanks all tom barrett - EnCirca:bye Cheryl Langdon-Orr:bye Attachment:
smime.p7s |