...
Members:
Participants:
Staff:
Apologies:
**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**
Transcript
Recording
The Adobe Connect recording is available here: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p12ovvcki0n/
The audio recording is available here:
Proposed Agenda
Notes
Action Items
Documents Presented
XPLANE presentation of draft diagrams
Chat Transcript
Brenda Brewer: (4/29/2015 23:39) Welcome to the CCWG ACCT Meeting #31 on 30 April at 05:00 UTC! Please note that chat sessions are being archived and follow the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior: http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/expected-standards
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (23:59) Hello everyone !
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (23:59) hello :)
Pär Brumark (GAC Niue): (23:59) Good morning everyone!
Tijani BEN JEMAA (ALAC): (23:59) Hi all
Greg Shatan: (4/30/2015 00:00) Good night, everyone!
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (00:01) Hello All
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (00:01) I have muted my line then :-)
Ingrid Mittermaier (Adler Colvin): (00:01) Hello!
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:01) Hello again!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (00:01) Hi Josh
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (00:02) again Indeed Robin!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (00:02) ahh now purple
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:03) Should we celebrate our #30 call ? Or not ?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:03) onlky #30?
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:04) Seemed like 50 or 100 right ?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:04) Staff please check who is waiting to enter AC I know Jordan is qued as well
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (00:05) Definitely in favor of celebrating call 30. We don't know if we'll make it to the 40 :P
Jordan Carter: (00:05) made it in
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:05) :-)
Rosemary Fei: (00:06) Hello, All. Sorry for being late -- I had a little trouble getting into adobe connect
Becky Burr: (00:06) Hello all, had trouble getting into the adobe room
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:07) Seems you were not alone in this Becky, welcome !
Jordan Carter: (00:07) If it's of interest to staff, the first couple of times it didn't present the acceptable use stuf
Jordan Carter: (00:07) the last time, when it di, I got into the room
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (00:09) Good suggestion, Robin
Jordan Carter: (00:09) that's wrong. It is defined.
Greg Shatan: (00:09) "Reference Mechanism" flummoxed me as well.
Jordan Carter: (00:10) it's on page 36 of the PDF.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:10) so a global replacement with "the Membership Model" ? is that correctly proposed??
Greg Shatan: (00:10) Is there some field of endeavor where the term "Reference Mechanism" is actually used?
Jordan Carter: (00:10) Problem is it needs to be defined the first time it is come across, not dozens of pages later.
Jordan Carter: (00:11) It's a label guys, just like any other label. It means what we say it means.
Greg Shatan: (00:11) If definitions ae our biggest problem, we are in good shape....
Jordan Carter: (00:11) Preferred mechanism? Suggested mechanism?
Jordan Carter: (00:11) Mechanism A? ;)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:11) I could live with them labled as ACSO Membership Model Yes that is clearer
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:12) I can too. It is more descriptive of what is meant.
Alan Greenberg (ALAC): (00:12) @Jordan, I have no problem with "It means what we say it means" but that means we must say what it means. And we haven't.
Chat TranscriptAthina Fragkouli (ASO): (00:12) +1 to Mathieu's suggestion
Jordan Carter: (00:12) Alan, yes, we have
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:12) Exctly Robin we shoiuld propose to go with that as soon as practicale in this que...
Jordan Carter: (00:13) we just haven't done so in the summary.
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (00:13) +1 to Mathieu by Izumi too
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:13) So Cheryl wants ACSO membership model, we have an alternate SOAC membership model
Jordan Carter: (00:13) we stick with the SO/AC order that we usually use, surely?
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:13) great suggestion, Josh.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:13) the terms just outlined by Josh for both has my support
FIONA ASONGA (ASO): (00:13) AC/SO model is better
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (00:14) ACSO Membership Model and ACSO Designator Model as the two terms appear to be intuitive.
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (00:14) And for the record the lawyers are also working on providing us with a simple and comprehensible definition for "designator" and "member" to be included in our glossary section
FIONA ASONGA (ASO): (00:14) yes Josh
Jordan Carter: (00:14) ICANN everywhere already labels these things SO/AC - so there is only confusion to be gained by rversing the order.
Julia Wolman, Denmark, GAC: (00:14) +1 Thomas
Jordan Carter: (00:14) We also always use it in that order in this report
Greg Shatan: (00:14) I agree it should be SO/AC and not ACSO.
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (00:14) lost audio
Jordan Carter: (00:15) and it has to be mentioned / described the first time it is used
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (00:15) can't listen to anything
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:15) I do not think the Action Item reflects the agreement for Action Correctly
Brenda Brewer: (00:15) Leon, your line is still connected. we will call you again
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (00:15) Thanks Brenda
Jordan Carter: (00:16) we could easily describe it, once naming it, as the "reference model"
Jordan Carter: (00:16) so be clear that it isn't the preferred or whatever
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:16) the clrification in Glosarry proposed by Thomas was bot as writ... it was to ensure the SO/AC Membership Model is fully efined and I assume the same for the Designator Model as well
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:16) Action item should be : substitute SO/AC membership model to "Reference mechanism" when we refer to this model in the doc, especially exec summary
Jordan Carter: (00:16) +1 Mathieu
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (00:17) I am back in the audio bridge
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:17) And also the point re Glosarry that gives details as per Thomas's interjection after the new use of terms as outlined by Josh was 'carried'
Avri Doria: (00:17) i have an editorial for para 11: it is IANA Function Review. the nme was changed in the latest draft.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:17) yes P 6
Sébastien (ALAC): (00:17) @Mathieu will not substitute but add
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:18) Para 16 page 6
Jordan Carter: (00:19) delete "as well as ICANN's nominating committee"
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:19) +1 Jordan
Jordan Carter: (00:19) it's too much detail to att it - let's just delete it
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:20) Yes I thought the NC wa sto be a 'Designator' within a Member Model and the new "...Council option" will need further discussion, but we need t clarify this in Doc (in not in Para 16)
Jordan Carter: (00:20) it doesn't foreclose taking that option under closer analysis
David McAuley (RySG): (00:20) para 04 (and others beyond exec summary, e.g. 27) mention 254 participants when should say 154
Jordan Carter: (00:20) but as it is it will just riase eyebrows
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:20) the uodate should obviously be in keeping with and refer to the new input from Legal Ciuncil just mentioned by Josh
Jordan Carter: (00:21) ok - gr8, ta
Sharon Flanagan (Sidley): (00:23) Sidley is reviewing with CWG issues in mind as well
Samantha Eisner: (00:29) On the Bylaws language on page 17 of the document, I thought that on a call over teh past week we'd agreed on a re-formulation so that we'd remove the term "Consensus Policies" and the reference to a portion of contracts
Becky Burr: (00:30) i have no actual proposal, just a question. will include question in report
Jordan Carter: (00:30) so do I, Samantha
Rosemary Fei: (00:30) Thanks, Becky. I was trying to figure out what the reference to your proposal meant!
Becky Burr: (00:31) i'm sorry, Sebastian, where do you want to strike consensus policy
Becky Burr: (00:31) ?
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:31) paragraph 56
Jordan Carter: (00:31) oage 17
Jordan Carter: (00:31) para in red starting with 56
Samantha Eisner: (00:31) Page 17, the para numbered 56
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:32) Yes I thought that had been agreed to go... good catch
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:32) that was ref to para 56
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:33) Para 60 seems to be one of the key components of WS1.
Jordan Carter: (00:33) I totally oppose para 60 being taken away
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:34) Indeed it does Robin and I see now reason to strike para 60 based ion what I have heard in the majority of the group
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (00:34) +1 Sebastian
Chris Disspain: (00:34) Hello all...sorry for being late
Ingrid Mittermaier (Adler Colvin): (00:34) +1 Sebastian
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:35) We are on Para 60 P 22 Chris
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:36) BTW my text above shule read I see NO reason to strike para 60
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:38) yes Alan clean text doc will need to go out for us all to double check as well...
Becky Burr: (00:38) promoting international participation, etc. is in Mission.
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (00:39) @Becky, is your team intending to insert language in paras. 58 and 59, in which it says "[Insert]"? Or will it be deleted.
Becky Burr: (00:40) we need the IETF and the root server group to provide language for those insertions
Becky Burr: (00:40) iwill reach out to them
Rosemary Fei: (00:40) But in para 60, the reference to "mission" is NOT to the Mission in the bylaws. Perhaps revise to say "any mission other than the Missions specifically authorized in these Bylaws."?
Sébastien (ALAC): (00:40) @Becky not internationall but worldwide please
Alan Greenberg (ALAC): (00:40) @Becky, I agree. Only issue is whether others at some point in the future take a far more narrow view of what "mission" means.
Sébastien (ALAC): (00:40) Comments on page 23
Becky Burr: (00:43) ok Rosemary, that works. and ok Sebastian on worldwide (global?)
Becky Burr: (00:43) noted Sebastian
Sébastien (ALAC): (00:45) @Becky Global is OK
Jordan Carter: (00:48) Robin can probably explain that
Chris Disspain: (00:48) sorry - which para are we discussing please?
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:48) para 169
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (00:48) Page 40 I believe
Alice Jansen: (00:48) top of p 39
Becky Burr: (00:48) private section led is in the White Paper actually, and the "rooted in the private sector" is in the current bylaws Alan
Alice Jansen: (00:48) 40 sorry
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:48) para 169 f page 40 in yellow
Jordan Carter: (00:48) top of p40 in the PDF
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:49) note: I meant to add that text in yellow to (d) since that is where we provide the rationale for the alternative
Avri Doria: (00:51) Part of the problem is the definition of private sector. In a UN type definition there are governments and all else is private sector, including users.
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:51) that is my understanding too. users are private sector for sure
Jordan Carter: (00:51) Lawyers have suggested the higher threshold can be done through the bylaws, as I understand it? lawyers?
Alan Greenberg (ALAC): (00:52) @Robin, yes, it should have been in d.
David McAuley (RySG): (00:52) Agree with understanding of Avri + Robin
Rosemary Fei: (00:52) Yes, SO/AC activities could continue to be conducted within ICANN; only the member/designator rights (under bylaws and contracts) would be in the UA.
Avri Doria: (00:53) Additionally, from the beginning the GAC was both connected to ICANN but not really of it. This has become less apparent recently, but historically that formal relationship between ICANN and the GAC, was considered important.
Greg Shatan: (00:53) Perhaps counsel can make the changes I suggest in their draft. Frankly, it's almost 2 am and I have a 7 am call and I have a terrible cold, so I am not in a position to line-edit the document right now. Sorry.
Becky Burr: (00:54) Article I, Section 2.11 "11. While remaining rooted in the private sector, recognizing that governments and public authorities are responsible for public policy and duly taking into account governments' or public authorities' recommendations.'
Rosemary Fei: (00:54) Yes, since each member would be in its own membership class, the community vote to recall the board could require a higher threshold to pass and trigger the termination.
Becky Burr: (00:55) @Robin - resistance is futile
Becky Burr: (00:55) :)
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:56) :-)
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:56) its too late for many of us!
Avri Doria: (00:56) resistence is never futile, just sometimes it becomes less necessary.
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (00:56) para 178 p41
Greg Shatan: (00:57) I thought 4(c) was too abstract. We need to show the engineering at some critical spots.
Jordan Carter: (00:57) raised
Jordan Carter: (00:57) identified
Jordan Carter: (00:57) specified
Jordan Carter: (00:57) noted
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (00:57) all the issues must be raised"
Greg Shatan: (00:57) Tabled means opposite things in US and non-US english.
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (00:57) as I learned in a GNSO council meeting one time, Greg....
Jordan Carter: (00:57) Raised
Alan Greenberg (ALAC): (00:57) "tabled" can mean start discussing something or stop discussing. Best to avoid the word.
Rosemary Fei: (00:58) To me, "tabling" means setting aside for later consideration.
Avri Doria: (00:58) yes 'tabled' has a culturally variant definition.
Sébastien (ALAC): (00:58) I have comments on §163 and 169
Alan Greenberg (ALAC): (00:58) @Rosemary, it ALSO means to put something on the table for discussion!
Becky Burr: (00:58) Bylaws and AoC.
Jordan Carter: (00:58) tabled is dead
Greg Shatan: (00:58) Or is it merely tabled?
Rosemary Fei: (00:59) Long live tabled
David McAuley (RySG): (00:59) Josh, 2..6.1.1 at 4c looks good but don't two people have to join?
Greg Shatan: (00:59) @Alan -- I think the formal use there is "lay on the table"...
Greg Shatan: (00:59) in the US at least.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:00) and exactly opposit in AU
Rosemary Fei: (01:00) @David, yes, each UA will need 2 "persons" -- others can be non-person participants
Greg Shatan: (01:00) @Jordan, thank you for your support...
David McAuley (RySG): (01:01) thanks Rosemary
Jordan Carter: (01:01) it's a critical thing to describe right, and describing it briefly isn't super easy
Jordan Carter: (01:07) thanks team, that was good
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (01:10) @David, yes, for an "association" to be a legal entity, at least two people must associate together, so it requires the participation of two individuals. Our FAQs and answers on the UAs may be a useful appendix, or at least paraphrasing the text from there.
David McAuley (RySG): (01:10) Thanks Josh
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (01:11) Avri is referring to page 55
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:13) Josh, I would very much welcome such an appendix.
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (01:15) note: para 349 contains some text that seems cut and pasted incorrectly. Particularly 2 Clause k on p. 59.
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (01:16) Agreed Sabine, I suggest the CCWG working team start with that prior deliverable from Sidley and can decide what to include or leave out
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:18) page 68
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:18) Conclusion is on p69
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (01:19) p74 para 540
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (01:20) ST13 p76 561
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:21) para 562
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:21) and 566
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (01:21) ST23 p79 para 619
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:21) para 619 p 79
Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC APRegional Member: (01:22) Thanks Steve :-)
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (01:23) THanks, Robin. I've fixed para 349. SHould not be an outline, just paragraphs
Alice Jansen: (01:24) Timeline: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/50823981/R-CCWG_timeline_v0.9.7.4.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1430316024000&api=v2
Jordan Carter: (01:25) I think we have to display this work plan / timeline in a way that is legible
Jordan Carter: (01:25) maybe we can just slice it into three or four month chunks and have them one below the previous
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:26) am I inferring correctly that the F2F on June 19 has been replaced by an intensive work period?
Jordan Carter: (01:26) No, Sabine
Jordan Carter: (01:26) (Not that I have heard anyway!)
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:27) it's not on there, that's why I'm asking.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:27) maybe it's a question of edits.
Jordan Carter: (01:29) I think it's fine because it says "includes"
Jordan Carter: (01:29) +1 Robin on this para 695
Jordan Carter: (01:29) it needs to be changed
David McAuley (RySG): (01:31) I think these "representatives" are the folks referred to in chat above - 2 people to "join" the community association
David McAuley (RySG): (01:31) not sure thougj
David McAuley (RySG): (01:31) lost audio?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:31) no audio from Jordan
Jordan Carter: (01:31) i've lost audio
Brenda Brewer: (01:32) Joran is back in
FIONA ASONGA (ASO) 2: (01:32) I am there
Jordan Carter: (01:32) there we are ,hi all
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:32) ha, I can't *6 myself
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:32) so I guess there are issues with the audio bridge.
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:32) Yes, I've been disconnected two times so far
David McAuley (RySG): (01:33) 696 seems fine
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:33) Very flacky I froze so often in the last part of this call I ad to log out and in again *sigh*
FIONA ASONGA (ASO) 2: (01:33) the word doc that was sent out earlier is slightly different from the PDFs doc.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:33) I have the meeting on 19 June confirmed
Ingrid Mittermaier (Adler Colvin): (01:34) agreed with using 696, deleting 695
Jordan Carter: (01:34) now I can't hear anything agian
Rosemary Fei: (01:34) Leon, do you want legal counsel at the meeting on June 19?
Jordan Carter: (01:34) oh there we go again
Greg Shatan: (01:34) We are being haunted by Jordan.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:34) thank you, Cherly and Mathieu. then maybe it should be put back on the timeline.
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (01:34) Would the co-chairs also please consider which meetings they would like outside counsel to attend in person, so that we may make travel plans as soon as possible. thanks.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:34) Cheryl, sorry. still finishing that first cup of coffee.
Rosemary Fei: (01:35) Where will meeting occur -- Buenos Aires?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:35) Yes BA
Jordan Carter: (01:35) We will def need the legal (I think) on 19 June
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (01:35) Just the June 19 meeting, or are there multiple days?
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:35) Yes @Josh we will definitely let you know ASAP
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (01:35) Absolutely, thanks
Jordan Carter: (01:35) unless the ONLY thing on the agenda is deciding how we speak to the community
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:35) There are multiple meetings in Buenos Aires Josh
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:38) shouldn't we also ask for input on the list of fundamental bylaws, i.e. what should be on there?
Jordan Carter 2: (01:38) we do ask for input on that in the body of the document, Sabine
Jordan Carter 2: (01:39) question 3 on page 36 of the PDF
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:39) alright, then I possibly misunderstood the purpose of the list of questions.
Jordan Carter 2: (01:39) is it not in the summary on the end?
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:39) nope.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:39) then I *did* understand :)
Jordan Carter 2: (01:39) para 715
Jordan Carter 2: (01:39) "list of requirements" is meant to include that
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:39) oh, I understand that differently.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:40) to me it only addresses the "how" not "what"
FIONA ASONGA (ASO) 2: (01:40) +1 Cherly
Jordan Carter 2: (01:40) how about "Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation, including the list of bylaws which should become Fundamental Bylaws?"
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:41) yes, that's great.
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:41) thanks again!
Julia Wolman, Denmark, GAC: (01:41) +1 Jordan, Sabine
David McAuley (RySG): (01:42) Agree w/Mathieu and we do have a second PC period
Jordan Carter 2: (01:42) I do NOT support extending the May Comment Period to 40 days.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:42) Nor do I
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:43) PC 2 is indeed another matter Yes
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (01:43) that is a good compromise, Jordan.
David McAuley (RySG): (01:43) agreed
Greg Shatan: (01:44) I do not support extending the first comment period to 40 days. Remember that initial comment periods were only 21 days until a few months ago.
Thomas Rickert: (01:45) Rememer we are providing interim results, no consensus position. This is another reason why a shortened pc period is appropriate - particularly since a second pc is planned for
Jordan Carter 2: (01:45) I think we have to stick with what we have signalled
Jordan Carter 2: (01:45) I vote that we move on
David McAuley (RySG): (01:45) Agree w/Thomas
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:45) you have my support for both suggestions, Jordan.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (01:46) just move on we have worked with these proposed timel lines now for some time
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD): (01:46) let's get on with it
David McAuley (RySG): (01:47) so we have until 23:59 utc May 1 for final notes - when can we expect next doc?
Samantha Eisner: (01:47) Yes
Samantha Eisner: (01:47) I can speak to it
Samantha Eisner: (01:47) 15 working days in advance of the beginning of the meetings
Jordan Carter (.nz, ccTLD): (01:47) my hope, my sincere hope, is that we'll have the doc out by 23:59 on 30 April UTC
Samantha Eisner: (01:47) but if we're only discussing the first report, I don't think we're in any violation
David McAuley (RySG): (01:47) thanks Jordan
Samantha Eisner: (01:47) agreeing with Mathieu
Greg Shatan: (01:48) Alan, I think that rule has been more honoured in the breach.... Noble thought it is.
Alan Greenberg (ALAC): (01:49) As I said, was not making an argument, just asking if it was an issue. Apparently not.
Avri Doria: (01:50) are the pictures avaialble?
David McAuley (RySG): (01:50) Agree w/Avri - can we get these slides
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:51) Yes, we will ask staff to forward them to the list
David McAuley (RySG): (01:51) Thanks - would like to use them w next doc
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:51) please do keep in mind that they're in draft mode and of course not final
Becky Burr: (01:51) i cant see the graphics
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (01:52) These are impressive. Nicely done
Avri Doria: (01:52) yeah but i really like to stare at pictures for a while to understand all they say
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (01:52) this is very helpful. thank you
Sivasubramanian M: (01:52) In Who gets to vote, is there any way of stitpulating that there is ccNSO votes don't double up as GAC votes? i.e However hard it might be, would it be possible to stipulate that ccNSO members who are not from Govrnment?
Rosemary Fei: (01:52) Please use "remove" for single directors, "recall" for entire board.
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (01:53) The 'donut' is a good representation for empowered community, using dots to signify voting weight.
Sivasubramanian M: (01:53) Know it wouldn't work, but if the distinction between GAC and ccNSO is blurred in most cases, either reduce the number of ccNSO votes or GAC votres
Avri Doria: (01:54) a quick glance, nice pics
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:54) Thanks Rosemary
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (01:54) will make sure the slides reflect that language
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (01:54) Donut ? Isn't that capture by a specific stakeholder ? ;-)
Adam Peake: (01:54) Link to the presentation file https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52896621/1XPL_CCWG_IllustratedConcepts_v1.1.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1430376824748&api=v2
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (01:55) thanks for the link, Adam
Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (01:55) as it is evocative of something else as well, I wouldn't think so Mathieu
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (01:55) this is really terrific!
Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (01:55) Thanks Robin. Assuming terrific is positive (unsure of English here)
Avri Doria: (01:55) good stuff!
Julia Wolman, Denmark, GAC: (01:55) Those graphics are very useful
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (01:56) indeed it is, Mathieu :-)
Jordan Carter: (01:56) It's great looking stuff. Just need to make sure we aren't prejudging the matter of a membership body
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (01:57) thank you for the clarification. good stuff!
David McAuley (RySG): (01:58) That's an interesting and perhaps difficult distinction, Leon
Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (01:58) on the IRP visual, I think we should note this improvement, shown on page 29 of our document: ICANN wold pay costs if the AC/SO membership filed the IRP
jorge cancio (GAC - Switzerland): (01:59) thanks for the graphics - so far existing structures are being improved or complemented a before/after approach would be of use
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (01:59) And also add on IRP visual the clarification that its scope includes violatations of established ICANN policies. That was a late addition to the text so visual drafters may not have seen it yet.
Samantha Eisner: (02:00) +1 Jorge
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (02:03) Thanks everyone, bye for now...
Jordan Carter: (02:03) thanks everyone
Pär Brumark (GAC Niue): (02:03) Agree! +1 Jorge!
Jordan Carter: (02:03) another excellent meeting
David McAuley (RySG): (02:03) Thanks all
Pär Brumark (GAC Niue): (02:03) Thank you all!
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (02:04) we have a very long way in a very short time.
Jordan Carter: (02:04) we have ____ a ?
FIONA ASONGA (ASO): (02:04) Thank you all
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (02:04) sorry, we have come a very long way...
Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair, ALAC): (02:04) Thanks everyone!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (02:04) indeed we have Robin
Jordan Carter: (02:04) great success
Jordan Carter: (02:04) bye
jorge cancio (GAC - Switzerland): (02:04) thanks!
Athina Fragkouli (ASO): (02:04) thank you all
Josh Hofheimer (Sidley): (02:04) good night averyone
Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (02:04) thanks all! Bye!
FIONA ASONGA (ASO): (02:04) bye
Sivasubramanian M: (02:04) bye
Julia Wolman, Denmark, GAC: (02:04) bye thanks
Edward McNicholas, Sidley: (02:04) Bye
Rosemary Fei: (02:04) Thanks, and good night.
jorge villa (ASO): (02:04) bye!
Adam Peake: (02:04) thank you
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (02:04) bye