Dear Alan, all, I was not aware of: " ...the planned intent was to have only the people at the table participate." And find this problematic, why should only some selected (?) people speak. Maybe I missed the point when this was agreed, but I would have strongly objected. If we have the claim to be equal footed within the multistakeholder environment, why do we introduce hierarchies among our self? I have no problem with some people only sitting on a panel or whatever, but not being allowed to speak is the wrong sign. A comment: I found it important to mention the visa problems of our member Beran, but after Fadi made a really constructive proposal the discussion could have been finished. We can take him by his word now and this proposal would really be a way out of such miseries. I would support a timer, also to be introduced in our ALAC meetings. Sandra -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Alan Greenberg Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Juni 2015 20:58 An: ALAC Betreff: [ALAC] Feedback on the new ALAC-Board meeting format I would appreciate thoughts on the new format that we tried today for the ALAC-Board meeting. I'll kick it off with my thoughts: 1. I thought that on the ALAC side, it was too much an "Alan Greenberg show". 2. There was a question/comment by Sebastien that I did not take because the planned intent was to have onlyl the people at the table participate. In light of 1, I am not sure this was appropriate. 3. At one point we contemplated having a timer. In light of a few of the interventions, I am inclined to do so next time. Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA C)