Hi, By and large looks reasonable. on slide 7
co-ordination by new small group (SO/AC reps, Board, Lawyers, ) to limit risk of friction, no decision making.
While seeing this as possibly useful, I would also hope to minimize the amount of topic framing and agenda setting done by this smaller authoritative group. Which points to another issue, which is the degree to which the agendas for meetings are not subject to participant review and especially that the opening of the meeting does not give the participants the ability to amend the agenda. While I respect the difficulty of the problems the chairs must deal with, I do believe that they have been a bit too autocratic at times and that this has, perhaps, interfered with our ability to resolve issues. For example the fact that we were prevented from discussing the implications of the competing models in this last F2F meeting have left us with unexplored fundamental disagreements and questions that should have been asked. avri On 28-Sep-15 12:47, Mathieu Weill wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
In anticipation of a discussion during our meeting tomorrow, please find attached a set of slides to suggest a way forward, for the group's consideration.
Thank you for your feedbacks.
Best regards, Thomas, Leon & Mathieu
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus