...
Info |
---|
PROPOSED AGENDA
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS GNSO Review Implementation Charter Recs 26-27-28-29 28 August 2017.pdf |
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Tip | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Attendees: Sarah Bockey, Jennifer Wolfe, Rafik Dammak, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, Lori Schulman Apologies: Kris Seeburn, Lawrence Owalale-Roberts ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund, Marika Konings, Amr Elsadr, Mary Wong, Julie Bisland |
Note |
---|
Notes/ Action Items Action Items:
Notes:
1. Update on Consensus Call on Charter for Recommendation 31 – Ended COB 25 September: -- No objections or comments submitted. The Charter is approved by consensus.
2. Status of Update to OEC/GNSO Council: -- Presentation to the OEC and the GNSO Council scheduled to take place at ICANN 60. -- Staff will provide a draft report to the WG within the next week.
3. Recommendations 26-29: Recommendation 26: -- If the questions on this recommendation concern whether or not to include SOIs for exec-com members, need to update this information on a yearly basis to match yearly exec-com elections in GNSO constituencies. -- Process to review policies under consideration is that they are discussed on GNSO PDP WGs, discussions take place within GNSO SGs/Cs, and the GNSO Council accepts WG recommendations - often, many of the required SOIs are already covered, but concern raised on formalizing a requirement for all the SOIs being updated. -- Not clear what is meant by a participant's interest or position being required to be disclosed - doesn't this take place anyway during WG deliberations? If a comment is being submitted on behalf of a client, this might need to be clarified. Language of the recommendation needs to be clearer on what is required for disclosure. From the Chat Room: Marika Konings: Maybe the question is as well what can be disclosed? Can it be stated that someone is participating on behalf of a client without stating who the client is or what their exact brief was? Recommendation 27: -- Questions to the GNSO Review WG include where a centralized list of SGs/Cs membership needs to be maintained, and what SOIs are required to be associated with this membership list Is this recommendation creating additional requirements for SOIs to be posted, or is it only requiring that posted SOIs be linked to the centralized GNSO membership lists also being recommended? Recommendation 28: -- No comments from WG members on this recommendation Recommendation 29: From the Chat Room: Marika Konings: -- Would it be more valuable to list actual leadership positions (with years held) as an accumulation may not be that helpful? -- Could an interim solution be to add a field asking people to list previous leadership positions held? and what is considered a leadership position, that may also require some definition? -- Suggestion to add a field that lists current and previous leadership positions, noting that a definition of leadership position needs to be agreed upon
4. Meeting Schedule: -- May be of value to hold a meeting on 19 October as well, to review any documents/reports that need to be submitted to the GNSO Council by the 10-day deadline to submit documents ahead of the 1 November public Council meeting. -- WG agreement: WG to meet on 12 and 19 October (with 12 October changed to 1400 UTC to avoid a conflict with the GNSO Council), and meeting on 26 October to be cancelled. |
...