Historical Resolution Tracking Feature » Posting for Public Comment – Draft ICANN Community-Anti-Harassment Policy
Important note: The explanatory text provided through this database (including the summary, implementation actions, identification of related resolutions, and additional information) is an interpretation or an explanation that has no official authority and does not represent the purpose behind the Board actions, nor does any explanations or interpretations modify or override the Resolutions themselves. Resolutions can only be modified through further act of the ICANN Board.
Posting for Public Comment – Draft ICANN Community-Anti-Harassment Policy
Whereas, during and after ICANN55, the issue of certain community-member conduct toward one another was raised in various ICANN sessions and on various ICANN email lists.
Whereas, the ICANN Board agreed to address the issue of ICANN Community member conduct toward one another.
Whereas, on 25 June 2016, following receipt and consideration of public comments, the Board approved (see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-06-25-en...) revised Expected Standards of Behavior, which more specifically addresses the issue of harassment than the earlier version had.
Whereas, in furtherance of the public comments referenced above, in consultation with an expert, as needed and appropriate, the Organization has developed a draft ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy for the Community’s consideration.
Resolved (2106.11.05.01), the Board hereby authorizes the posting of the draft ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy for public comment for 60 days in order to give the Community sufficient time to discuss the draft Policy, as well as formulate and submit public comment(s) on the draft Policy.
Resolved (2016.11.05.02), following receipt of public comment, the Board will evaluate those comments and will again engage with the Community to the extent significant changes to the proposed Policy are suggested.
During and after ICANN55, the issue of certain community-member conduct toward one another was raised in various sessions and on various email lists, and the Board agreed to address this matter. In response, the Board has confirmed and reiterated that ICANN’s Board and staff take the issue of harassment or other improper conduct at its meetings very seriously. ICANN and members of the community share the goal of ensuring that ICANN community members are able to participate and contribute within an environment that remains free from harassment.
As an organization, ICANN has robust internal policies regarding the issue, including mandatory training. While ICANN community members are not bound to the same policies and rules as the ICANN organization or the Board, everyone who participated in ICANN processes should expect community members to adhere to certain Expected Standards of Behavior. In addressing the issues identified at ICANN55, one step taken was to revise the Expected Standards of Behavior to specifically call out issues of harassment and the fact that such conduct is not acceptable in any ICANN fora. The revised Board-approved version of ICANN’s Expected Standards of Behavior can be found at: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en.
In addition, as directed by the Board, the organization worked with an expert, as appropriate and necessary, to develop a draft “Community Anti-Harassment Policy” for the Community’s consideration and comment. If adopted, the Policy should be followed at ICANN Public meetings and throughout other ICANN community interactions. The draft Community Anti-Harassment Policy is the Reference Materials document to this Board Paper and incorporates many of the ideas suggested in response to the public comments received on the revised Expected Standards of Behavior (for report on those comments, see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-expected-sta...).
It is not anticipated that this decision will have any fiscal impact on ICANN, and it will not have any impact on the security, stability or resiliency of the domain name system.
This decision is an Organizational Administrative Function that is directly leading to public comment on this topic.