SO/AC Meeting #25 (13 July 2017 @ 19:00 UTC)
- Brenda Brewer
Sub-group Members: Alan Greenberg, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Christopher Wilkinson, Greg Shatan, Herb Waye, Jorge Villa, Julf Helsingius, Kavouss Arasteh, Olga Cavalli, Sebastien Bachollet, Steve DelBianco
Observers: Jodi DeShane, Stephen Deerhake
Staff: Bernard Turcotte, Berry Cobb, Brenda Brewer, Mandy Carver
Apologies: Avri Doria, Farzaneh Badii
** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to acct-staff@icann.org **
Transcript
Recording
Agenda
0. Call Admin and Roll Call / Apologies (2min-SDB, CLO) Apologies Farzaneh Badii
1. Welcome - Opening Remarks - Our Reconvening and purpose (3-5 min-SDB, CLO)
2. Review (brief) of last meeting (F2F) at ICANN #59 any Action Items (5-10 min- SDB, CLO) See review notes attached in previous email from Steve del Bianco
3. Discussion and options for any Recommendation text edits or changes (25-35 min SDB, CLO)
- T1 - Track 1 and “Best Practices”
Excerpt from last meeting notes - Some prefer a label other than “best practices”. One alternative is “Good Practices”
Not much support for having ATRT examine implementation of best practices. Found support for assessing best practice implementation in the Organizational Reviews.
Track 1 and SOAC Accountability to the “broader community”
Not much support for Board’s comment seeking accountability of the collective SOACs, when acting as the Empowered Community.
"EC Decisional Participants should be accountable to the community as a whole, not just their respective SO/AC"
No board or staff took my invitation to provide suggestions for how to do this.
A Co-chair said we need ICANN-wide conversations, not just decisions within each SOAC.
One speaker noted that each AC/SOs will consider broader community when they are deciding on escalation of EC powers.
We should address Board comment with an explanation in our report.
One speaker suggested Organizational Review also look at cross-accountability.
- T1 - Track 1 and “Best Practices”
- T2 - Track 2 and [Mutual] Accountability Roundtable
Several said don’t do Accountability Round Table – revert to our original draft recommendation.
Note that SOACs can share best practices in their leadership emails and calls.
Idea to start with the optional Accountability Roundtable, and if it works we could make it an annual requirement.
- T2 - Track 2 and [Mutual] Accountability Roundtable
- T3 - Track 3 IRP; Discussion of the question posed, if not IRP then what (if any) mechanism.
4 . Next Steps. (5 min- CLO, SB)
- - Public comments and our discussions will be taken on-board by CCWG Accountability WS2 to consider amending our recommendations and then publish a report on results of the public consultation.
- CCWG will also need to determine if any changes to our report are significant or not.
- If significant changes are recommended, CCWG-Accountability WS2 may have a second public consultation.
- If changes are not significant, CCWG-Accountability WS2 can forward final recommendations to Chartering Organizations for approval, and then to the ICANN Board for consideration and adoption.
- On Sunday, at the F2F Meeting, nobody suggested we need another round of public comments
- - Public comments and our discussions will be taken on-board by CCWG Accountability WS2 to consider amending our recommendations and then publish a report on results of the public consultation.
5. AOB / Meeting Schedule (5 min- CLO)
- Thursday 20th 0500 UTC, 27th 1300 UTC
Raw Captioning Notes
Please note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call
Decisions:
- ATRT reviews - The text about ATRT are on p. 7-8 of the report. That's where we would change the recommendation to say that Organizational Reviewer could assess implementation of "Good Practices" We would recommend that this assessment be reflected in the Operattional Standards for the Organizational Reviews (no objections).
- No support for any additional accountability to the community by the EC or SOACs
- Round Table - Drop the recommendation for an optional round table and return to the original recommendation = we do not recommend a formal MAR, noting that a minority of our group prefers a public gathering of AC/SO leaders (1 objection).
- Re IRP to appeal actions or inactions by SOACs.ICANN already give the Ombuds the role to investigating complaints. Actions or inactions. So we would make the recommendation stronger as opposed to saying such as only a bullet. We would clarify it has an appropriate roll to look at action or inaction. I'll just put that into chat. That Ombuds already has a role to action or inaction. I think we should add that the process used by the Ombuds office may be enhanced and or clarified by the work stream two group recommendations reviewing the ombudsman. That's para phrasing a little bit of what Sebastien said. We could not know at this point but we're indicating that role for the Ombuds may be enhanced or clarified by other work stream two process. How does that sound?
Action Items:
- Rapporteurs will edit the recommendations to reflect the decisions above so this can be considered on the list and at the next meeting.
Requests:
- (none)
Documents Presented
Chat Transcript
Brenda Brewer: (7/13/2017 13:12) Good day and welcome to SO/AC Subgroup Meeting #25 on 13 July 2017 @ 19:00 UTC!
Brenda Brewer: (13:13) If you are not speaking, please mute your phone by pressing *6 (star 6). This call is recorded.
Brenda Brewer: (13:13) Reminder to all, please speak slowly and state your name before speaking for the Captioner. Thank you!
Steve DelBianco: (13:52) Hi, Brenda. Could you please have the PDFs ready to load -- the ones on my most recent email to this group?
Brenda Brewer: (13:52) yep, all ready!
Steve DelBianco: (13:53) 1. Our draft report. 2. Summary of public comments. Thanks
Brenda Brewer: (13:54) Draft report?
Brenda Brewer: (13:55) I see all the attachements, but not one called draft report
Brenda Brewer: (13:55) i have it
Brenda Brewer: (13:55) from link
Steve DelBianco: (13:56) okay, please grab it from https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_files_ccwg-2Dacct-2Dws2-2Ddraft-2Drecs-2Dimprove-2Dsoac-2Daccountability-2D29mar17-2Den.pdf&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=kbiQDH54980u4nTPfwdloDLY6-6F24x0ArAvhdeDvvc&m=80vUb1yGH_OMnM5f4gtCnxZu3aGJXXk-suJjamiDhA0&s=2xrCV7dQSf_EHnuRiy86ns0T7R5hZIXm2cCa3TNZCDI&e=
Brenda Brewer: (13:58) thanks, that's the link i used.
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (13:59) HI ALL
Julf Helsingius: (14:00) Great! Thanks!
Herb Waye Ombuds: (14:00) Hi everyone
Herb Waye Ombuds: (14:02) sounds good
Steve DelBianco: (14:02) Bottom of page 11 is where we suggest Ombuds.
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (14:06) captionning up
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (14:09) scroll control
Brenda Brewer: (14:10) scroll for all
Brenda Brewer: (14:10) is on
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (14:11) the Brenda, and my line is muted at the handset, I was not contributing the Bg noise :-)
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (14:12) my bad Cheryl
Steve DelBianco: (14:13) Org Reviews in ICANN bylaws: Sec 4.4 on Organizational Reviews: The goal of the review, to be undertaken pursuant to such criteria and standards as the Board shall direct, shall be to determine (i) whether that organization, council or committee has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, (ii) if so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to improve its effectiveness and (iii) whether that organization, council or committee is accountable to its constituencies, stakeholder groups, organizations and other stakeholders.
Kavouss Arasteh: (14:16) Dear All,
Kavouss Arasteh: (14:16) I am waiting to be connected
Brenda Brewer: (14:17) Hello Kavouss. Am I to call your mobile number?
Christopher Wilkinson (CW): (14:20) Supporting Alan's reservations on this point. CW
Steve DelBianco: (14:24) the text about ATRT are on p. 7-8 of our first report. That's where we would change the recommendation to say that Organizational Reviewer could assess implementation of "Good Practices"
Steve DelBianco: (14:25) We would recommend that this assessment be reflected in the Operattional Standards for the Organizational Reviews
Kavouss Arasteh: (14:25) NO . NOT AT ALL
Julf Helsingius: (14:25) no bjection
Steve DelBianco: (14:35) Recc: we do not recommend a formal MAR, noting that a minority of our group prefers a public gathering of AC/SO leaders
Steve DelBianco: (14:39) Herb: we are recommending that the Ombuds be the place for people to pursue complaints about AC/SO action or inaction.
Steve DelBianco: (14:40) We are not saying this is a bylaws change
Herb Waye Ombuds: (14:41) not ICANN bylaws, but the GNOS or ALAC or group charter
Steve DelBianco: (14:42) @Herb -- okay, but I do not think we are recommending any change to the charters for AC/SO. These bodies are already covered by ICANN bylaws -- including the role of the Ombuds
Olga Cavalli: (14:42) i apologies for being late
Herb Waye Ombuds: (14:43) Eliminating IRP coverage is your choice, you don't need to replace it with Ombuds because the office already covers it
Herb Waye Ombuds: (14:43) Positive reinforcement of the option is always good PR for me
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (14:45) exactly Herb
Steve DelBianco: (14:45) Our Recc: The Ombuds already has the role to address complaints about an AC/SO action or inaction
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (14:45) Time check - 15 minutes left in call
Herb Waye Ombuds: (14:45) sounds good to me
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (14:51) hand
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (14:53) Agree Alan
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (14:56) Webster dictionary - a procedure that has been shown by research and experience to produce optimal results and that is established or proposed as a standard suitable for widespread adoption
Steve DelBianco: (14:56) THanks, Bernie. Is there a definition for "Good Practices"?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (14:57) for the Record I agree with Greg and Alan here
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (14:58) @Steve - not really - Webster has = a good or wise thing to do It's good practice to always carry a few dollars in cash.
Alan Greenberg: (14:59) "Practices that have proven useful in many situations"
Alan Greenberg: (14:59) "Practices that have proven useful in many (but not all) situations"
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (15:00) How about the thing that was formally called "a best practice"
Greg Shatan: (15:01) Potentially Useful Practices
Alan Greenberg: (15:01) "The Practive formerly known as good"?
Steve DelBianco: (15:01) thanks all. Have a "Best" evening
Greg Shatan: (15:01) PUP
Bernard Turcotte - ICANN: (15:01) cheers
Herb Waye Ombuds: (15:02) have an adequate day all...
Alan Greenberg: (15:02) "best" wishes to all.
Greg Shatan: (15:02) Decent evening, everyone!
Herb Waye Ombuds: (15:02) sufficient job Cheryl
Christopher Wilkinson (CW): (15:03) B'ye CW
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): (15:03) thanks everyone, bye for now