Yes, I realize that the agenda we are discussing is for TOMORROW.  And I would appreciate you using a more polite tone, please.
 
The thing is that tonight we only have about an hour and a half (or less) to discuss all that we have been discussing today before Alan has to leave which will leave us with little or no time to discuss what was actually supposed to be discussed tonight.  That is my point.
 
You were not told that the Summit wasn't ready for the Board by any Secretariat that I am aware of.  Please come to us for your future briefings as we will be more than happy to comply.
 
Thank you,
 
Darlene

From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com]
Sent: Mon 10/29/2007 8:40 PM
To: Thompson, Darlene; 'Bret Fausett'; 'At-Large Global List'
Subject: RE: [At-Large] <IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday'sAtLarge communitymeeting with ICANN Board

No – the agenda that we have been discussing all day is the one for TOMORROW.

Tonight is the joint meeting, with one item added which is the agenda for TOMORROW approval -  the rest of the agenda for tonight remains the same AFAIK.

This addition was part of the briefing I got this AM.

I was also told that the Summit wasn’t ready for discussion with the Board. As this first information I got was corrected by you and Sebastien, it’s on the draft agenda for the BO that was updated on the wiki per the request from Hong.

 

From: Thompson, Darlene [mailto:DThompson@GOV.NU.CA]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 17:16
To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com; Bret Fausett; At-Large Global List
Subject: RE: [At-Large] <IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday'sAtLarge communitymeeting with ICANN Board

 

Ummm... Jacqueline,

 

Please refer to your agenda.  It is tonight's meeting that was supposed to be a joint ALAC/Secretariats meeting, not tomorrow's.  That is what I was refering to.  This joint meeting seems to have been replaced by a planning meeting for tomorrow.  So be it.  I am fexible enough to bow out to the more important items.  I got the idea that the Summit was being dismissed from tomorrows agenda by your postings.  I can't see how they could be taken any differently.

 

Darlene

 

From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com]
Sent: Mon 10/29/2007 7:10 PM
To: Thompson, Darlene; 'Bret Fausett'; 'At-Large Global List'
Subject: RE: [At-Large] <IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday'sAtLarge communitymeeting with ICANN Board

Darlene

I have no idea to what you refer as being railroaded, the first draft as sent had NO RALO member participation at all. I particularly added ALS names to presentations for the meeting with the BOARD tomorrow (if you notice, Didier, Danny have been added, also my first suggestion that we include issue specialists from the secretariats and ALSes!) – this is the agenda for that meeting, not for the joint meeting today at 19:00.

I also have no idea where you got the idea that the Summit was dismissed – Sebastien has sent notes on that, and in the briefing I got today, I was told that the Secretariats wanted to discuss it   before presenting it - so the compromise suggestion is there to have a general intro to the Summit proposal, with space to present it fully when the Secretariats say OK.

I also do not appreciate the aggressive tone at all.

 

From: Thompson, Darlene [mailto:DThompson@GOV.NU.CA]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 15:31
To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com; Bret Fausett; At-Large Global List
Subject: RE: [At-Large] <IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday'sAtLarge communitymeeting with ICANN Board

 

Jacqueline,

 

This is the first "joint" meeting of the ALAC and Secretariats and so far the Secrtariats have been completely left out.  In fact, when we put something forward it is just dismissed (Summit).  If this session is just going to be the Secretariats being railroaded by ALAC then I want nothing to do with it.

 

Somehow this has gone from a joint meeting to a meeting discussing the meeting tomorrow.  Fine, but do try to include what the "other half" wants discussed, too, K?  Elsewise its a bit misleading, don't you think?  Yesterday it was discussed and agreed that we would be presenting on the Summit and now it seems to be tossed out of the window by one person.  I am very against this kind of un-transparent process.

 

Sorry to be negative but I was SO happy at the end of yesterday, thinking that maybe some of the BS was behind us and that maybe we could all be productive together and now I see it all starting again.  This is just getting depressing.

 

Darlene

 

From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Jacqueline A. Morris
Sent: Mon 10/29/2007 5:30 PM
To: 'Bret Fausett'; 'At-Large Global List'
Subject: Re: [At-Large] <IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday'sAtLarge communitymeeting with ICANN Board

OK
Here's my take on the agenda now:
Introductions – Jacqueline 5 mins
 - Acknowledgement and introduction for outgoing and incoming ALAC members
 - New members introduction
ALAC in Transition- Veronica – Report on – One day  Workshop - 5 mins
Discussion with Board on the future of ALAC and At Large - 30 mins
Policy issues -
- gNSO improvement and gTLDs – Alan (5 min + discussion 5 min - total 10
min)
- IDNs - Hong, Bilal - 10 min (include IGF, work with GAC and ccNSO)
- IPV4 and IPV6 – Izumi, Didier - 10 min
- Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAAs), Registry Escrow  -Beau, danny -
10 min
- Bylaws change (brief mention and any questions from Board before they get
to it in their meeting) - Jacqueline ; Cheryl - 5 mins max
- Budget- Cheryl and Annette - 15 mins total

This takes us to about  100 min, leaving 20 min for flexibility - e.g. late
arrival of Board members(happens a lot as they have to do many meetings) as
well as some flexibility to increase discussion time on issues that may turn
out to need more time.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bret Fausett [mailto:bfausett@internet.law.pro]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 14:19
To: At-Large Global List
Subject: Re: [At-Large] <IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday's AtLarge
communitymeeting with ICANN Board

I agree with this as well. A significant portion of the meeting should be
open for a more flexible discussion of the status and future of the ALAC.

      Bret

> agree with Siavash
> that we should include a visioning issue as well.


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007
11:02

   

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007
11:02



_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org
ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02

 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02