[gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] RE: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] ICANN News Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments‹GNSO Policy & Implementation Recommendations

[Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>]

I wonder if there's some kind of Guide or Manual we could prepare based on
the WG's output.  Even if it is informal/non-binding, it could be useful to
carry forward our principles.

Greg

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Amr,
>
> I fully agree with you on the importance of the principles.  In that
> regard, I think it is going to be incumbent on all of us who know the
> principles well to bring them up and reinforce them when needs arise.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Amr Elsadr
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 11:03 AM
> To: Mary Wong
> Cc: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg]
> [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg]
> ICANN News Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments‹GNSO Policy &
> Implementation Recommendations
>
>
> Hi Mary,
>
> Yes…, this certainly makes sense. Still just curious how/if the
> recommended principles will somehow be adopted. Combining those principles
> with both the traditional PDP and the new processes changes the nature of
> how gTLD policy is developed and implemented (for the better, I hope). The
> way I see it, this was ultimately what this WG was chartered to do. The
> idea was never to propose new processes just for the sake of having new
> processes, but rather on how the community can remain engaged during
> implementation, and address any policy-related challenges that arise as a
> result.
>
> To be clear, I’m not complaining or anything. Adopting these new processes
> is great, and I look forward to the GNSO putting them to good use. Marika
> also did helpfully suggest possibilities on how adoption of the principles
> could happen on another thread. I guess I’m just (perhaps a bit eagerly)
> waiting to see how this all plays out in the end. IMHO, the principles
> developed by the WG are truly fantastic, and could provide great guidance
> on how to address development and implementation of gTLD policy for both
> the GNSO as well as other SOs/ACs (and beyond).
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Amr
>
> > On Aug 10, 2015, at 5:22 PM, Mary Wong <mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Gulp, I meant, of course, to say "Annexes to the EPDP and the GGP” in
> > the second sentence; sorry!
> >
> > Cheers
> > Mary
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: <owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Mary Wong
> > <mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Monday, August 10, 2015 at 11:19
> > To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re:
> > [gnso-policyimpl-wg] ICANN News Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws
> > Amendments‹GNSO Policy & Implementation Recommendations
> >
> >> Hi Amr - thanks for bringing up this question to the group. You are
> >> right about the objective of the new processes, of course, but note
> >> that the proposed Bylaw changes are meant only to incorporate the two
> >> new processes that affect voting thresholds and adoption levels. As
> >> such, the intent there is to have the Bylaws more fully reflect the
> >> policy processes of the GNSO - since the Bylaws at the moment only
> >> refer to one (the PDP). That’s why the GIP is not included, and
> >> that’s also why the Annexes to the EPDP and the GIP (which will be
> >> added to the GNSO Operating Procedures much as the PDP Manual now is)
> were.
> >>
> >> The wording in the new Annexes about implementation basically also
> >> track that of the PDP Manual, so again this was for consistency and
> certainty.
> >> It would therefore be quite a different exercise to add one out of
> >> the various Principles that the WG developed to the Bylaws.
> >>
> >>
> >> I hope this helps.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Mary
> >>
> >> Mary Wong
> >> Senior Policy Director
> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
> >> Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
> >> Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: <owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Amr Elsadr
> >> <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Date: Monday, August 10, 2015 at 09:16
> >> To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>,
> >> "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] ICANN News
> >> Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments‹GNSO Policy &
> >> Implementation Recommendations
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Apologies for the late response to this thread, but I’ve been very
> >>> busy these past weeks moving back to Cairo from Tromsø.
> >>>
> >>> I have a slight concern that is associated with a question I had on
> >>> another thread regarding how the recommended principles in the final
> >>> report would be addressed.
> >>>
> >>> I probably need to go through this all a great deal more thoroughly,
> >>> and will do so before drafting a statement for the public comment
> >>> period, but this is my take right now:
> >>>
> >>> It was my feeling that the intent of the WG final recommendations
> >>> was to empower the chartering organization (GNSO council) to be
> >>> involved in the guidance of implementation of policies. This was
> >>> very carefully worded in principle B4
> >>>
> >>>> 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.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This principle has not, as far as I can tell, been adequately
> >>> addressed in the proposed amendments to the bylaws. In fact, it
> >>> seems to me that excluding it — while including other details in the
> >>> new processes where the board directs ICANN staff to work with the
> >>> GNSO on implementation plans “if deemed necessary” based on the
> >>> recommendations in the EPDP or GGP final report — makes the decision
> >>> of an IRT being chartered to work with staff implementing policies
> >>> one of the ICANN board, not the GNSO council.
> >>>
> >>> Am I reading too much into this?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Amr
> >>>
> >>>> On Aug 3, 2015, at 3:09 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you very much Marika.
> >>>>
> >>>> Chuck
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
> >>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 3:21 AM
> >>>> To: Gomes, Chuck; gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>> Subject: Re: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws
> >>>> Amendments‹GNSO Policy & Implementation Recommendations
> >>>>
> >>>> That is correct – the only things that were updated were references
> >>>> to other sections in the ICANN Bylaws; the voting thresholds were
> >>>> added to Section X.3-9 as they were defined in other parts of the
> >>>> report; in footnote 1 ‘supermajority vote of the GNSO Council’ was
> >>>> changed to ‘a GNSO supermajority vote’, and; duplicative
> >>>> definitions that were originally in section 9 ‘additional
> definitions’ were removed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Marika
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Chuck Gomes <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Date: Sunday 2 August 2015 23:31
> >>>> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>,
> >>>> "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Subject: RE: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws
> >>>> Amendments—GNSO Policy & Implementation Recommendations
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Marika.  Glad to see this moving forward.  I did a quick
> >>>> review of the Bylaws changes and didn’t note any significant
> >>>> changes to what we proposed.  Am I correct on that?
> >>>>
> >>>> Chuck
> >>>>
> >>>> From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika
> >>>> Konings
> >>>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 4:01 AM
> >>>> To: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>> Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Fwd: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed
> >>>> ICANN Bylaws Amendments—GNSO Policy & Implementation
> >>>> Recommendations
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> For your information.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Marika
> >>>>
> >>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>>
> >>>> From: "ICANN News Alert" <communications@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Date: 1 augustus 2015 05:24:16 CEST
> >>>> To: <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments—GNSO
> >>>> Policy & Implementation Recommendations
> >>>> Reply-To: communications@xxxxxxxxx
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> News Alert
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-07-31-en
> >>>>
> >>>> Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments—GNSO Policy & Implementation
> >>>> Recommendations
> >>>> 31 July 2015
> >>>>
> >>>> Forum Announcement:
> >>>> Comment Period Opens on
> >>>> Date:
> >>>> 31 July 2015
> >>>> Categories/Tags:
> >>>> Policy Processes
> >>>> Purpose (Brief):
> >>>> During its meeting on 24 June 2015, the GNSO Council unanimously
> >>>> adopted the recommendations of the GNSO Policy & Implementation
> >>>> Working Group
> >>>> (see:http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/policy-implementation-recommen
> >>>> datio
> >>>> n
> >>>> s-01jun15-en.pdf), which was tasked to address a number of
> >>>> questions as they relate to GNSO policy and implementation. Among
> >>>> others, these recommendations include three proposed new GNSO
> >>>> processes, two of which—the GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) and the
> >>>> GNSO Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP)—require changes to
> >>>> the ICANN Bylaws1 subject to ICANN Board approval. Per its resolution
> of 28 July 2015 (see:
> >>>> https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2015-07-
> >>>> 28-en
> >>>> #
> >>>> 1.c), the ICANN Board has directed that these proposed changes to
> >>>> the ICANN Bylaws be posted for public comment prior to ICANN Board
> >>>> consideration.
> >>>> Public Comment Box Link:
> >>>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amendments-2015-07-31-
> >>>> en 1These proposed changes to the ICANN Bylaws are accompanied by a
> >>>> GGP and EPDP Manual, which can be found in Annex D and F of the
> >>>> GNSO Policy & Implementation Final Report (see:
> >>>> http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/policy-implementation-recommendatio
> >>>> ns-01
> >>>> j
> >>>> un15-en.pdf) and would be incorporated into the GNSO Operating
> >>>> Procedures following adoption of the proposed ICANN Bylaws changes
> >>>> by the ICANN Board.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This message was sent to marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx from:
> >>>> ICANN News Alert | communications@xxxxxxxxx | ICANN | 12025
> >>>> Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email
> >>>> Marketing by
> >>>>
> >>>> Manage Your Subscription
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
>
>