[governance] Review Panels

[George Sadowsky]

Dear José,

Your timing is good.  I believe that there will 
be an ICANN meeting in Peru in about a year's 
time.  Find out who has volunteered to be the 
local host and work with them.

You don't need to wait until next year.  Start 
with the ICANN web site, and connect with those 
people in Latin America who are active in ICANN 
and in the regional registries, such as Olga 
Cavalli, Raul Echeberria, Vanda Scartezini and 
Alejandro Pisanty.  Think about which issues you 
would like to be involved in and learn about what 
is happening.  Talk with Anne Lord on the ISOC 
staff who is present at ICANN events.  Observe 
what is being posted on the ISOC Chapter List and 
participate in it.


Come to the ICANN meetings in Seoul, Nairobi and 
Brussels if you can; I know that it is expensive, 
but that's one reason why ICANN moves its 
meetings around the world  --  so that when ICANN 
comes to Peru, there can be intensive 
representation of people from Peru and also from 
the surrounding countries.

Does Peru have a representative on the GAC?  If 
not, why not?  It's open for them.

I'm glad that you want to get involved.  I'll 
look forward to meeting you,either in Peru, or 
before.

Regards,

George Sadowsky

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


At 8:39 PM -0400 10/15/09, jfcallo at isocperu.org wrote:
>Distinguished members of this list:
>I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in 
>participating in ICANN, contribute from our 
>experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send 
>an e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
>Thanks
>Jose F. Callo Romero
>     Secretario
>     ISOC Peru
>
>
>Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:
>
>>Bertrand,
>>
>>There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and
>>representativeness; these review panels will require individuals
>>with extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas
>>under review (which is why independent experts are cited as part of
>>the necessary review team mix).
>>
>>The teams will include:
>>
>>the Chair of the GAC
>>the CEO of ICANN
>>representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
>>representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
>>representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
>>representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
>>representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
>>representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
>>independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason
>>Group, the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community
>>members)
>>
>>and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members
>>will be joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and
>>Information of the DOC,
>>
>>The current arrangement calls for the 
>>composition of the review team to be agreed 
>>jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in 
>>consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of 
>>ICANN.
>>
>>Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will 
>>likely be a call for volunteers (similar to the 
>>recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors). 
>>The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon 
>>whomever best promotes the ICANN interest 
>>(likely those that have never been critics) and 
>>will then advance those names to the Chair of 
>>the GAC.
>>
>>I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a 
>>whitewash as all earlier ICANN self-review 
>>efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier 
>>commissioned review of transparency and 
>>accountability provided in the One World Trust 
>>report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of 
>>transparency with robust accountability 
>>mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
>>
>>Don't waste your energy on this project.  The 
>>deck will be stacked from day one.
>>
>>best regards,
>>Danny Younger
>>
>>
>>--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle
>><bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
>>Subject: [governance] Review Panels
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
>>Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>>
>>
>>Dear all,
>>
>>Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?
>>What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the
>>community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :
>>how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that
>>it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the
>>variety of viewpoints ?
>>
>>In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>>
>>Best
>>
>>Bertrand
>>
>>
>>
>>On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen
>><anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>>
>>snip
>>
>>Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>>the process likely to be?
>>
>>Anriette
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>____________________
>>Bertrand de La Chapelle
>>Délégué Spécial pour la Société de 
>>l'Information / Special Envoy for the 
>>Information Society
>>Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
>>Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and 
>>European Affairs
>>Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>>
>>"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir 
>>les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
>>("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>>
>>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance