<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>Just with regard to ATRT3 - there's not a whole lot to report back on at the moment in order to inform this conversation, since we're only a few weeks in, are still wrapping up the scoping stage, so there hasn't been a lot of progress in diving into the review itself. However, I would note that implementation of previous reviews is something we're meant to be looking at fairly closely, and I think that would be a good area to raise with the CEO directly as well, as that ties nicely back to the original issue as Tatiana framed it, especially around where recommendations don't get implemented, or get dragged out for years, or otherwise meet forms of institutional resistance.</div><div><br></div><div>Happy to chat further.</div><div><br></div><div>Michael</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 3:59 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <<a href="mailto:bruna.mrtns@gmail.com">bruna.mrtns@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Dear Tanya, <div><br></div><div>Thank you for your email, I was already considering including this topic in my talking points as in the previous call NCUC had with Goran we talked a bit about his views about this consultation/moment. </div><div><br></div><div>At the moment, both me and Lou referenced Stephanies conversation with him about the role of CS within ICANN, as well as if the MS model could be improved and NCUC role in all these discussions. To this question, he replied by mentioning that his work has always been related to "<i>strengthen and improve relations with civil society groups. And that he felt that this was demonstrated with ICANN’s work around developing the Temp Spec. ICANN’s previous discussions with the Community led him to speak to the Data Protection Authorities (DPAs), which resulted in the Temp Spec’s Calzone model.</i>" - He used the GDPR discussion as a silver lining to mention that he did not wish for policy discussions at icann to be one-sided and that it was his job to ensure any conversation included civil society. </div><div><br></div><div>Back at this call he also mentioned the upcoming session in kobe about the evolution of ICANN’s multistakeholder model and encouraged our participation on it. Additionally he mentioned that <i>"without Civil Society groups, and without At-Large, ICANN would be a trade organization and the multistakeholder model would not exist in its current form."</i> Unfortunately the timing of the above mentioned call, which happened prior to Japan, was unfortunate and only allowed an introductory conversation on this. But given that NCSG is writing a comment on this issue, I would be more than happy to bring the views submitted at the comment or AOBs regarding to this discussion. <br></div><div><br></div><div>I also agree about the ongoing and unfinished processes going on at the community and would like to shine a light on this topic, maybe <a class="gmail_plusreply" id="gmail-m_1344481218329288020plusReplyChip-0" href="mailto:mkaranicolas@gmail.com" target="_blank">@Michael Karanicolas</a> could also help elaborate smth here with some insight from the ATRT3 team ? Additionally, it would be great to bring input on HRs here too considering that<a href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2019-05-15-en" target="_blank"> ICANN just published its first HRIA</a>. </div><div><br></div><div>I am open to whatever suggestion our membership has! <br><br>Thanks again for the input, Tatiana! </div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Bruna <br><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le mer. 29 mai 2019 à 15:14, Dr. Tatiana Tropina <<a href="mailto:t.tropina@mpicc.de" target="_blank">t.tropina@mpicc.de</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi Bruna and all,</p>
<p>We did discuss this on the NCSG level, but might be worth to
suggest bringing this from the NCUC perspective as well - I will
leave it to you and to the membership to decide how worth this
topic would be for chair's meeting with ICANN CEO. </p>
<p>So the issue is the following. There have been concerns expressed
by our members (both NCUC and NCSG) about the work on the
so-called evolution of multi-stakeholder model. I personally --
and I believe I am not alone -- would really like to have some
more clarity as to how this work correlates with other processes
and how we ensure that it doesn't harm or duplicate the on-going
work by the ICANN community, especially on accountability. This
work on evolving MS model has started while there are some
processes on reforming ICANN has not been finished due to various
reasons, including resource allocation: for example, there is
community developed recommendations for WS2 accountability,
including accountability of AC/SOs, Human Rights Core value, still
not adopted, and we are still not even near the implementation and
the timeline is not clear, let alone the required resources. There
is ATRT3 work going on, there is PDP 3.0 implementation work of
the GNSO council, so how the work on the evolving model correlates
with all this, especially accountability, in terms of resources
and efforts? Are we trying to reform something before even
implementing the set of reforms that are already on the table and
waiting to be implemented? <br>
</p>
<p>This would be my suggestion.</p>
<p>Warm regards,</p>
<p>Tanya <br>
</p>
<div class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail-m_9193134596004031624moz-cite-prefix">On 29.05.19 18:35, Bruna Martins dos
Santos wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Dear NCUCers,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On June 12 I will have a call with ICANN's CEO and if
theres any suggestion of topics that could added to the
agenda, I would really much appreciate it. <br>
<br>
Are there any questions NCUC would like to ask ICANN org ?
PDPs, budgets/resources allocation ? <br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Please write back in case you wish to suggest anything. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best Regards, </div>
<div>-- <br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail-m_9193134596004031624gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><b><i>Bruna Martins dos Santos </i></b></div>
<div>
<div>NCUC Chair </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail-m_9193134596004031624mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail-m_9193134596004031624moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
<a class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail-m_9193134596004031624moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a>
<a class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail-m_9193134596004031624moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail-m_1344481218329288020gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><b><i>Bruna Martins dos Santos </i></b></div><div><br></div><div><div>Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos<br></div><div>@boomartins<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>