Hi Bill, On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 7:41 PM Bill Jouris via At-Large < at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote: the casual, serendipitous chats, which are what create and cement
effective group efforts, simply don't happen.
I have multiple counter-examples against that assertion. I am not saying that going more-virtual is not without downsides and challenges. On the balance, however, the benefits of inclusiveness and accessibility and reduced costs outweigh the downsides many times over.
With serious negative impacts all around.
I challenge that assertion -- ESPECIALLY if the virtual meetings are augmented by occasional regional and constituency-specific F2F meetings. Including on various efforts near and dear to your heart. There is precious little in ICANN that I would claim near or dear. Given that my tenure in ALAC's face-to-face meetings witnessed a great many failures and few successes (applicant support for newGTLDs, a transparent compliance efforts, public-interest commitments, getting a second At-Large Board member, and total dismissal of two ALAC white papers among the more notable failures I can recall) it will be very hard to convince that going more-virtual can further depress that track record. I invite you to name a single ALAC policy win -- in which ALAC activity steered or overturned an existing ICANN path -- that could not have happened without face-to-face meetings.
I certainly noticed the impact on my own efforts these past two years without in-person meetings.
ICANN's implementation of virtual meetings sucks and is obsessed with staff control. If it actually did virtual right, you might not feel so disadvantaged. Cheers - Evan