[NCUC-EC] Statement on Transparency and Off-list Communication

Mon Jun 11 21:11:57 CEST 2018

Hey all,

I dont oppose to the general content of the communiqué but would suggest
suppressing whats in red and adding whats in green.

Also, in light of the fact that Renata, Michael and Me have already
answered the IGF proposal point in the thread, I would take the second
paragraph out (the part between brackets), for the sake of making the text
shorter/more direct. I took some minutes to think about the text and no
longer see any reasons for readdressing the issue. What do we think ?

@Renata, given that you think this issue has already been addressed, if
this texts is voted to be sent do you want us to mention your objection ?
How would this go ?

-----------

*First off, we can confirm that we sometimes use off-list methods to
communicate with one another, both individually and at times, as a group.
We do not believe this represents is not any violation of our bylaws or
operating procedures. Indeed, the transparency section of our bylaws
(section VII) specifically contemplates instances where information may
need to be withheld, such as where its disclosure would negatively impact
our engagement with a policy under discussion. In other instances, we may
use offlist communications for more informal or social chatter, unrelated
to the NCUC decision-making process like. Or we may use alternate measures
to try and get the attention of a person where on-list communications are
going unanswered.EC deliberations take place on-list. But, when juggling
multiple communication tracks, it is inevitable that there can be some
overlap, or instances where a communication that should be made on-list is
made using an external service. [That was the case with regards to the
latest IGF proposal, where some of the reviewing feedback was given via
Skype. In part, this was due to the quick turnaround of the proposal, and
the pending deadline (for a full timeline of how the IGF proposal was
developed, please see the discussion on the NCUC-Discuss list here
<https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2018-June/044315.html>). It
is worth noting that, in this case, substantially identical feedback was
sent to the ExComm list at the same time, in order to ensure that it was
documented.]Nonetheless, we acknowledge that the use of off-list
communication is a problem. In order to remedy it, one suggestion would be
for us to develop and approve guidelines for off-list discussions, and
rules around their archiving and disclosure. If members feel that is a good
idea – we would be happy to develop a draft for discussion. We believe this
would make us the only Constituency or Stakeholder Group which has taken
steps to address this nearly universal issue - and would be glad to be at
the forefront of that debate.Transparency and accountability are values
that we hold dear and, in many cases, are active advocates for across the
ICANN communities. The challenge of managing formal and informal avenues of
communication is a common one across the transparency sector, particularly
with the expanding diversity of communications tools and devices that we
now have available. We are committed to doing better, and to working harder
to foster trust between the EC and its constituents. As always, we welcome
constructive feedback.We look forward to the conversation.The NCUC
Executive Committee*

2018-06-11 15:36 GMT-03:00 Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com>:

> Hi,
>
> The following is a statement which EC members developed over the past two
> days. It is now submitted for EC approval as a statement in response to the
> previous days' discussions:
>
> Recently there’s been some discussion about EC deliberation and
> procedures. We would like to clarify a few things.
>
> First off, we can confirm that we sometimes use off-list methods to
> communicate with one another, both individually and at times, as a group.
> This is not a violation of our bylaws or operating procedures. Indeed, the
> transparency section of our bylaws (section VII) specifically contemplates
> instances where information may need to be withheld, such as where its
> disclosure would negatively impact our engagement with a policy under
> discussion. In other instances, we may use offlist communications for more
> informal or social chatter, unrelated to the NCUC decision-making process.
> Or we may use alternate measures to try and get the attention of a person
> where on-list communications are going unanswered.
>
> EC deliberations take place on-list. But, when juggling multiple
> communication tracks, it is inevitable that there can be some overlap, or
> instances where a communication that should be made on-list is made using
> an external service. That was the case with regards to the latest IGF
> proposal, where some of the reviewing feedback was given via Skype. In
> part, this was due to the quick turnaround of the proposal, and the pending
> deadline (for a full timeline of how the IGF proposal was developed, please
> see the discussion on the NCUC-Discuss list here
> <https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2018-June/044315.html>).
> It is worth noting that, in this case, substantially identical feedback was
> sent to the ExComm list at the same time, in order to ensure that it was
> documented.
>
> Nonetheless, we acknowledge that the use of off-list communication is a
> problem. In order to remedy it, one suggestion would be for us to develop
> and approve guidelines for off-list discussions, and rules around their
> archiving and disclosure. If members feel that is a good idea – we would be
> happy to develop a draft for discussion. We believe this would make us the
> only Constituency or Stakeholder Group which has taken steps to address
> this nearly universal issue - and would be glad to be at the forefront of
> that debate.
>
> Transparency and accountability are values that we hold dear and, in many
> cases, are active advocates for across the ICANN communities. The challenge
> of managing formal and informal avenues of communication is a common one
> across the transparency sector, particularly with the expanding diversity
> of communications tools and devices that we now have available. We are
> committed to doing better, and to working harder to foster trust between
> the EC and its constituents. As always, we welcome constructive feedback.
>
> We look forward to the conversation.
>
> The NCUC Executive Committee
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCUC-EC mailing list
> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>
>

-- 
*Bruna Martins dos Santos *

Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20180611/c9d09bdc/attachment.html>