[NCUC-EC] Fwd: Reminder ICANN Document Development and Drafting Pilot Program

Mon Apr 25 03:45:25 CEST 2016

Hi Milton,

2016-04-25 10:25 GMT+09:00 Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>:

> I want to express my strongest opposition to this entire program.
>
>
>
> I have carefully observed the role of ICANN staff in the drafting of CCWG
> proposals and the assessment of public comments on those proposals. For the
> most part, staff did a very professional job, but in the final analysis
> there was no way to avoid the critical conflict of interest that existed.
>
>
if you check the questionnaire, there are several options and I didn't
select those about drafting comments, not even initial draft . I am pretty
aware about our position regarding any 3rd party involvement in making
policy position

>
> If you are trying to reform ICANN in a way that redistributes power from
> ICANN board and staff to the community, it is a very bad mistake to allow
> the administration, drafting and assessment processes to be controlled by
> ICANN staff. This problem manifested itself in numerous ways. The latest
> example is the evisceration of the Human Rights Framework of Interpretation
> provisions (see the CCWG list for details).
>
>

we will be involved on hiring that resource policy. for reminder it is
pilot project,  if we don't like, we can say sorry we don't to use it. it
is also up to us to decide on which area that resource person would work
and what he/she should deliver.

>
> Now we are asked to outsource our only important function – policy
> development – to ICANN staff.
>
>
>
it is 3rd party and it is not about drafting our own statement and
comments. many of newcomers are asking for briefings and material to
catch-up . our overloaded volunteers cannot do that.

Big mistake. There is no doubt in my mind that this will lead to a total
> loss of control over the policy development process by civil society
> stakeholders. Just as board, staff and legal had too much influence over
> the ICANN accountability CCWG, ICANN the corporation will become the
> controlling factor in the development of “community” policies.
>
>
>
> ICANN already provides enormous amounts of support to its GNSO council and
> working groups.
>

>
> This needs to be resisted not only by NCUC but blocked for all other
> constituencies as well. ICANN’s stakeholder groups need to be in control of
> policy development, not the staff.
>
>
>
>
>

well other constituencies that are even responding to more public comments
than NCSG are asking for such reports with regard to research efforts.

we need to find a real solution for scaling-up: ICANN in general and GNSO
in particular initiated several work we have to catch-up. 3 heavy PDP that
will last for years and our pool of volunteers is not increasing
exponentially. we end-up mostly with the same folks in the 3 working
groups, it is not sustainable not suitable.

in same time our membership grow up quite quickly and we are not doing
enough in term of in-reach and engagement. having discussed with several
members since I was in NCSG chair,  I got many times feedback that they
want to be better informed, having easy to read briefings, summary of NCUC
position etc. for now we don't have such handy thing (last request was
about having a NCUC slides deck for outreach) and we are doing things in
ad-hoc manner.

I will be happy if we can find a solution outside ICANN. do we have it? I
am pragmatic here: it is a pilot project, 100 hours of policy resources
likely to be a postgraduate student or phd to do some research for us. if
we are not happy, we can moveon
On other hand, I thought about NCUC applying for fellowship programs such
google policy fellowship or mozilla program, but I don't know if we are
eligible, to get a fellow work for NCUC for 1 year. I also thought about
working with some organizations to get interns for NCUC. I will be glad to
hear other proposals

Best,

Rafik

> *From:* NCUC-EC [mailto:ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] *On Behalf Of *Rafik
> Dammak
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 24, 2016 7:50 AM
> *To:* ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
> *Subject:* [NCUC-EC] Fwd: Reminder ICANN Document Development and
> Drafting Pilot Program
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> I filled the questionnaire on what kind of support NCUC can use for this
> pilot experiment (questionnaire attached, excel file). if there is no
> strong objection, I will send it in monday after NCUC EC call.
>
>
>
> we can use this resource for NCUC and but also to support NCSG PC work. in
> fact, NCSG can get its own part of support from the program.
>
>
>
> getting the admin support helped a lot to take some workload from the
> chair with regard to administrative tasks. in same fashion, this policy
> resource would help us to get more research work and briefing about policy
> issues for our members, preparing for public comments.
>
>
>
> there are a lot of policy discussion going on and we have to work on
> bringing more volunteers on board and preparing them, in order to expand
> the pool of volunteers. such support would help for our in-reach and
> engagement activity.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Rafik Dammak* <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> Date: 2016-04-06 15:53 GMT+09:00
> Subject: Reminder ICANN Document Development and Drafting Pilot Program
> To: "ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org" <ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> we overlooked this and I would like to work on this pilot project. we have
> nothing to lose and we can experiment the added value to have policy
> support. I am thinking that we can use such resource to get briefings and
> research work for the new 3 PDP WG initiated lately.
>
> I will send the filled questionnaire by this weekend for review.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Rafik
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Rafik Dammak* <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> Date: 2016-02-23 3:38 GMT+09:00
> Subject: Fwd: ICANN Document Development and Drafting Pilot Program
> To: ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please review this. There is a pilot project to provide policy support for
> GNSO groups. I was interviewed last year about this
>
> There is questionnaire to respond to
>
> Best.
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Daniel O'Neill" <doneill at wbcglobal.com>
> Date: Feb 19, 2016 6:51 AM
> Subject: ICANN Document Development and Drafting Pilot Program
> To: <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Robert Hoggarth" <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>, "David Olive" <
> david.olive at icann.org>
>
> Rafik:
>
>
>
> I hope this note finds you doing well.
>
>
>
> I am writing to you today to follow up on and encourage your participation
> in the Document Development and Drafting pilot program I am working with
> Rob Hoggarth and Carlos Reyes to stand up.
>
>
>
> You were so generous with your time last year to assist us in the scoping
> process to really understand the needs of your constituency and how we
> could design a pilot program to address these needs and to facilitate
> greater participation in the ICANN process.
>
>
>
> David Olive had sent an e-mail in January introducing the idea of Document
> Development and Drafting Pilot Program, and asking for your feedback on how
> the pilot can assist the NCSG.
>
>
>
> As you know from our earlier discussion, I have been asked to develop this
> pilot program to provide additional assistance to the ICANN communities to
> increase their bandwidth and ability to engage in a greater number of ICANN
> comment opportunities.  Based on our prior conversation, we certainly saw
> the NCSG as one of the communities that we would be in a position to engage
> with and assist with this pilot program.
>
>
>
> I have attached an overview of the pilot program for your review as well
> as a short questionnaire that we would very much like for you to complete —
> to give us some initial guidance on the priority areas where you see this
> program being able to assist the IPC.
>
>
>
> If it would be helpful to you, I would be happy to have a call on the
> pilot program at any time in the near future to discuss the program; the
> objective; and structure for assisting communities in their drafting needs.
>
>
>
> As David's note mentioned, we want to get the program ramped up prior to
> ICANN55 and are past some of the target dates for feedback.  We are now
> working a condensed timeframe and would encourage you to complete the
> questionnaire as soon as possible — we would very much like to include the
> IPC in this pilot.
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you have some time to get on the phone next week to
> discuss.
>
>
>
> I look forward to hearing back from you and working with you to develop
> this program into something that will be valuable for your community.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> *Daniel O'Neill*
>
> Principal
>
> WBC Global
>
> 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW
>
> Suite 1110
>
> Washington, D.C. 20036
>
> Doneill at wbcglobal.com
>
> 202.445.3720 (m)
>
> 202.640.2580 (f)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20160425/5514e2af/attachment.html>