/
Public Comments Reconceptualization (A Proposed Model)

Public Comments Reconceptualization (A Proposed Model)

Owned by Ken Bour
Jul 08, 2014

Introduction

Staff is evaluating a new model under the general category of Community Input & Feedback which advocates (a) segmenting solicited advice by respondent type (e.g., stakeholder organizations vs. unaffiliated parties); (b) hosting separate technology platforms for different use cases (e.g., static for organized structures; dynamic for individual contributors); and (c) broadening the envelope of participation mechanisms so that each type of contributor finds an appropriate communication channel to ICANN.

Model Foundation

The overriding criterion that engendered this reconceptualization is that ICANN has purposefully created a set of formal structures, namely its Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, precisely to inform and advise it on matters related to the global Internet Domain Name System for which it has responsibility and accountability. The process of collecting input and feedback on critical matters related to ICANN's mission should recognize, support, and emphasize the importance and significance of these knowledgeable, informed, and invested voices that have been organized expressly to represent the breadth and depth of Internet communities across the globe. Because these structures are instituted under the auspices of ICANN and its Bylaws, they are uniquely committed to the bottom-up consensus-driven collaboration construct as well as the principles of fairness, openness, representativeness, transparency, and accountability.

While special attention, consideration, and service should be accorded to the formally recognized structures, ICANN is accepting of input provided via other channels; therefore, a generic capability should also exist to enable any unaffiliated/unaligned party to contribute observations, comments, and feedback on matters related directly or tangentially to ICANN's mission, purpose, scope, and operations.

ICANN Input & Feedback Model

The following approach intentionally excludes the following input/feedback capabilities which will be considered separately:

  • ICANN Public Meetings (including forums and workshops)
  • Unsolicited Correspondence
  • Independent Advice supplied directly to the Board (e.g., SSAC, GAC)
  • Surveys
 Type of Input/Feedback
Model ElementInformed/Expert ConsultationAll Other Input (Unaligned)
Participant
Communities

Internal:

  • Supporting Organizations
  • Advisory Committees
  • Chartered Working Groups

External:

  • I* Organizations (IETF, ISOC, et al.)
  • Unaffiliated Internet users
  • Any interested party
Subject/Topic
Applicability
  1. DNS Topics
    • Top-Level Domains
    • Second-Level Domains
    • Contracted Party Agreements
    • Internet Protocol Addressing
    • Intellectual Property
    • Policy Processes
    • Security & Stability
  2. Operational Topics
    • Accountability & Transparency
    • Finance & Operations
    • ICANN Board & Bylaws
    • Legal & Regulatory
    • Meetings, Events & Conferences
    • Reviews & Improvements
    • Participation
  3. Ecosystem Topics
    • Internet Governance
    • Privacy

Generally speaking, technically complex and
sophisticated topics would only be relevant
to SOs, ACs, and WGs; however, certain
generic topics may be candidates for cross-
posting to accept input from the population
of unaligned, but interested, parties.

Solicitation
Characteristics 

Considered input/feedback/advice is specifically
solicited (i.e., by invitation) by the ICANN Board, Staff,
a chartered WG, or an SO/AC

Input is accepted and considered, when offered,
but is generally not solicited from the unaligned
universe of Internet users in deference to and
preference of the ICANN bottom-up consensus
model which relies upon the SO/AC and Working
Group structures

Key PrinciplesOpenness, Representativeness, Transparency, AccountabilityOpenness, Transparency
Proposed
Methodologies 
  • Formal topic announcement on ICANN.org
  • Notification sent to specific groups (selectable
    by publishing entity) 
  • Specific dates for comments (e.g., minimum=21
    days; target=30 days)
  • Input accepted from recognized structures only
    (no individual entries permitted - must go through
     official organization consensus/voting process)
  • Input/feedback is statically published (i.e., threaded
    commentary/discussion/replies is inappropriate
    given the nature of the collaboration and collection
    processes utilized to establish a statement/position)
  • Staff formally summarizes stakeholder consultation
    (Note: Solicitations remain in "Recently Closed"
    status pending report publication) 
  • Staff initiates an "Issues Tracking Checklist" to
    document ideas, suggestions, complaints,
    concerns, etc., and provides status as each one
    is managed to a formal disposition
  • Upcoming topics collected and published (trimester)
  • Support for subscription to topics on the basis of
    approved categories (currently 16-see above) 
  • Anonymous view; registration required to post
  • Capability to support formal topic announcement
    and open forum where topics/comments are
    provided voluntarily by participants
  • Dates may be stipulated or left open, as appropriate,
    until interest wanes on a topic followed by archive
  • Input accepted from any interested party including
    members of ICANN structures desirous of providing
    input outside their organizations' formal statements
  • Input/feedback should be dynamic (i.e., threaded
    discussion capability) although moderated to ensure
    compliance with ICANN Behavior Standards
  • Summarization of comments submitted will generally
    not be provided except when specifically requested
    by a recognized stakeholder community, ICANN
    executive, Working Group, or the Board
    (Note: "Recently Closed" is not applicable to or
    supported in this platform)
  • RSS Feed capability (subscription) to forums
  • Upcoming topics linked to originating source
  • Anonymous view; registration required to post
Preferred
Technology
Solution(s)

Confluence Wiki

  • Stakeholders are already registered
  • Platform enhances flexibility, customization,
    control, and administration
  • Differentiates ICANN stakeholder input from
    generic comments supplied by unaligned/
    unaffiliated entities and individuals
  • Specialized environment including personalized
    administrative and technical support 
  • Separate server instance to ensure support for
    unique capabilities (hide page history, remove
    unneeded menu options, disable comments, et al.)
  • One login serving multiple Confluence instances

ICANN Website

  • Public presence
  • Moderated by ICANN Staff to ensure adherence to
    Standards of Behavior
  • User pre-registration in order to comment

Social Media

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Blog platforms permitting comments

SCOPE Team Wiki