Content Comparison

...

Agenda:

1. Welcome
2. Updates
3. AOB
4. ClosingWe have been repeatedly signalling our concern about the imbalance of representation in some ICANN structures (such as the NomCom). We were hoping that the Pilot Holistic Review would provide an avenue to discuss those imbalances, but to our surprise, our candidates for representatives were rejected as members. This imbalance could further skew the outcomes of the review, as it overlooks crucial representation from the Non-Commercial sector. Proper balance is a concern that affects the entire ICANN community, and it’s essential that we ensure fair input from all sides

5. ICANN logic is heavily marked by, for lack of a better concept, a North American perspective on how to do business and how procedures (f. ex., legal frameworks) should work. However, the RDRS is a result of, if we could say that, a more European-ish way to see human rights and to protect them. When we talk about the transparency and accountability of the RDRS, those values seem to be more heavily aligned with a human rights-centered view of how the system should work. However, we have seen lots of times a preference to protect ICANN’s or CPH’s trade secrets or confidentiality. Does the board think that ICANN should turn itself to a more HR-centered approach when the org and the community plan the next steps of the RDRS? What does that mean regarding the transparency of the system?

6. What are the Board's plans for the Anti-Harassment Working Group and what actions, plans, or strategies do they plan to use to reform ICANN’s processes to handle sexual harassment, including providing actual autonomy to the Office of the Ombuds, with strict timelines?
7. What actions is the Board taking to create the new Ombuds office and allow it to be totally independent of ICANN.  1) the need for the new Ombuds to be totally independent of ICANN, the ability to protect the people who report issues to the Ombuds along with any impacted people.  Since the Ombuds is not an independent entity, it falls back on its past role to protect ICANN Org’s interests—reputation, financial interest, or damage to organizational integrity. Instead of investigating and finding out the facts, it does this to protect the people who come to it with allegations and complaints.
8. 1. In response to this letter https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/badii-et-al-to-sinha-24sep24-en.pdf , ICANN Board mentioned that they will ensure that the ombuds office is going to be independent. What sort of new changes have been made to make sure that the ombuds office has the autonomy and independence needed to protect the community and staff and not just ICANN org's interest and reputation? 
   
   Additionally, the letter requested that ICANN retract the message posted on August 15, 2024. The Board's response did not address this request. Will ICANN review its processes on drafting community messages that communicate a willingness to change, rather than defensive and inadequate messages that sideline the victims? Will ICANN review its processes on drafting community messages that communicate willingness to change instead of defensive and inadequate messages that sideline the victims? Has the Board anti-harassment working group started discussing the best path forward with the community?