Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting. Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role. First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest. Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'. I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive. - Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
Minority maybe, but not alone. Jacqueline A. Morris Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and Free. (after Chris Lehmann ) On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
I agree with you Carlton. Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done. But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost. Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved. Dev Anand On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
Dear All, I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ??? Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating. Kind Regards, Sala On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell: +679 998 2851
+ 1 Kind Regards, Sylvia Herlein Leite -----Mensagem original----- De: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Enviada em: lunes, 30 de abril de 2012 23:04 Para: At-Large Worldwide Cc: LACRALO discussion list Assunto: Re: [At-Large] [lac-discuss-en] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague Dear All, I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ??? Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating. Kind Regards, Sala On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear all, I indeed had been asked about this and forwarded an enquiry to the ALAC working list. http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002011.html But I was not able to get back to the Board with the views of our community (rather than my own views) before their announcement. I had no idea they were going to proceed without a proper consultation with the community. Kind regards, Olivier On 01/05/2012 03:03, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote :
Dear All,
I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ???
Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Dear all, I am on your side on that matter. I am still struggling with this issue on the Board. I hope that part of the situation is a missing piece in the communication but not sure 100%. A public board meeting will take place during the week (if subject matter). All the best Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> Le 02/05/12 00:54, « Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond » <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear all,
I indeed had been asked about this and forwarded an enquiry to the ALAC working list. http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002011.html
But I was not able to get back to the Board with the views of our community (rather than my own views) before their announcement. I had no idea they were going to proceed without a proper consultation with the community.
Kind regards,
Olivier
On 01/05/2012 03:03, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote :
Dear All,
I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ???
Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
I am in two minds about this. If the board is transparent in all its meetings, and increasingly it is trying to be, then ending a day early might work well. The meetings are starting earlier, I think most of us (except perhaps when the meeting's in our region) start to travel on a working day before the formal week of a meeting and often get back on a Sunday or later. For the board it's becoming almost 2 weeks. We're a volunteer community that's perhaps asking too much of our employers. And I don't know how staff manage, from 7 to late for over a week (jet lagged.) But. Loosing reports from the SOs and ACs matters (even at 8am...) Important that reports are read into the record, and important the directors sitting formally as the board are to be able to ask questions, the community also. And the Board meeting isn't just a show. Important comments often made. I recently had reason to refer to Mike Silber's comments on outreach made during the board meeting (attached). A statement much more powerful because it was made during an on record meeting of the board rather than teleconference or at the public forum. Would be a terrible to loose this. And thanking people --outgoing volunteers, the hosts-- is an important formality. If 3 or 4 hours on Friday is lost, where can it be squeezed during the week? Mike Palage noted there were 3 other board meetings during the Costa Rica meeting (minutes etc online). The board has an enormous amount for work to do. But if they meet when scribing's available, they should make use of it (we don't even have to be in the room, anyone with a laptop/smart phone can follow the text stream). Might be the right decision, but some public discussion before it was taken would have been helpful. And if's to happen, then transcripts of all board meetings please. Adam On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> wrote:
Dear all, I am on your side on that matter. I am still struggling with this issue on the Board. I hope that part of the situation is a missing piece in the communication but not sure 100%. A public board meeting will take place during the week (if subject matter). All the best Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com>
Le 02/05/12 00:54, « Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond » <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear all,
I indeed had been asked about this and forwarded an enquiry to the ALAC working list. http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002011.html
But I was not able to get back to the Board with the views of our community (rather than my own views) before their announcement. I had no idea they were going to proceed without a proper consultation with the community.
Kind regards,
Olivier
On 01/05/2012 03:03, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote :
Dear All,
I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ???
Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Adam: I understand your concerns and while not fully supportive of my position, you actually added several reasons to this conversation that makes me even more resolute on my position. Many thanks for sharing the comments from Mike Silber. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
I am in two minds about this. If the board is transparent in all its meetings, and increasingly it is trying to be, then ending a day early might work well. The meetings are starting earlier, I think most of us (except perhaps when the meeting's in our region) start to travel on a working day before the formal week of a meeting and often get back on a Sunday or later. For the board it's becoming almost 2 weeks. We're a volunteer community that's perhaps asking too much of our employers. And I don't know how staff manage, from 7 to late for over a week (jet lagged.)
But. Loosing reports from the SOs and ACs matters (even at 8am...) Important that reports are read into the record, and important the directors sitting formally as the board are to be able to ask questions, the community also.
And the Board meeting isn't just a show. Important comments often made. I recently had reason to refer to Mike Silber's comments on outreach made during the board meeting (attached). A statement much more powerful because it was made during an on record meeting of the board rather than teleconference or at the public forum. Would be a terrible to loose this.
And thanking people --outgoing volunteers, the hosts-- is an important formality.
If 3 or 4 hours on Friday is lost, where can it be squeezed during the week?
Mike Palage noted there were 3 other board meetings during the Costa Rica meeting (minutes etc online). The board has an enormous amount for work to do. But if they meet when scribing's available, they should make use of it (we don't even have to be in the room, anyone with a laptop/smart phone can follow the text stream).
Might be the right decision, but some public discussion before it was taken would have been helpful. And if's to happen, then transcripts of all board meetings please.
Adam
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> wrote:
Dear all, I am on your side on that matter. I am still struggling with this issue on the Board. I hope that part of the situation is a missing piece in the communication but not sure 100%. A public board meeting will take place during the week (if subject matter). All the best Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com>
Le 02/05/12 00:54, « Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond » <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear all,
I indeed had been asked about this and forwarded an enquiry to the ALAC working list. http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002011.html
But I was not able to get back to the Board with the views of our community (rather than my own views) before their announcement. I had no idea they were going to proceed without a proper consultation with the community.
Kind regards,
Olivier
On 01/05/2012 03:03, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote :
Dear All,
I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ???
Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
I am very troubled by the decision to remove the public meeting. As I see it, this presents several issues for the community: 1) The Board meeting typically closes a cycle of community discussion with a vote/resolution on some issue, and these end-of-meeting Board resolutions are important. The deadline of closing an issue at a public meeting also keeps the Board on track. Do they still intend to meet and close issues? This needs to happen. 2) The public meetings became a bit of orchestrated theater over the years, but I still believe they served the purpose of showing the Board's professionalism in addressing and resolving difficult issues. Last June's meeting on New TLDs is the most recent example of this. Take a look at this picture from Singapore that ICANN features on its website: http://www.icann.org/en/about That's worth a thousand words. Note the people in the foreground using their camera phones to capture the moment. We're losing that. 3) Closing the monthly meetings while leaving these end-of-session meetings open was something of a compromise reached between a prior Board and the ICANN community many years ago. I am concerned that the Board decided to change the status quo without any notice and comment. 4) As always, ICANN is under scrutiny with the IANA bid still to be resolved and issues of transparency at the forefront of some of those discussions. The way this was handled (was there a Board resolution? Chair's decision?) only makes the optics worse. I can't seem to find any background on how this decision was made, or why it was made. Bret
I have mixed feelings about this decision.On one hand, having spent 6 years on the Board, I have experienced how painful were the Thursday night preparations for the Friday Board meetings. Sometimes people were exhausted and some drafting was done without the full attention needed for details. I even remember decisions changed overnight (the one about holding the Seoul meeting after the Sydney meeting, for instance).However, as many have noted, the risk is that one more opportunity for dialogue with the community is gone. I don't know the details of the discussion that has taken place on the Board, and therefore whether this public Board meeting is being replaced by other events to take place duringthe week, but I hope so.I am looking forward to a public discussion in Prague about this subject. I also assume that feedback in Prague and immediately afterwards will be collected by the Board and used to make a long term decision. I also observe that most probably forthe Toronto meeting it will be inevitable to go back to the Friday session, because at the end of the Annual Meeting the new Directors have to take office, the Chairpersons have to be elected, the committees have to be populated. Unless I am missing something, this will mean that the last act in the Annual Public Meeting will be a Board meeting in which this business is managed.Being Prague close to my home, I will have the opportunity to attend the meeting and see what kind of interactions the Board will have with the community. If alternatives to the Friday session are developed, the Friday meeting will not be missed. If, on the other hand, this will result in a plain reduction of the communication in a plenary session, the community will make its voice heard loud and clear.About the reports from SOs and ACs. While on the Board I have argued often that those could be written beforehand and distributed, leaving the prime time at the plenary only for questions and answers on the reports. This must not necessarily take place after the public forum, and therefore Friday, but can also take place on Thursday before the public forum.Last but not least, I doubt that the cancellation of the Friday session will mean that the Board will leave one day earlier, we have often had committee meetings and other activities going on on Friday afternoon, the Chairperson and the CEO have their press conferences, and other odds and ends go on.Cheers,Roberto > From: bfausett@internet.law.pro
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 22:23:16 -0700 To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org CC: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague
I am very troubled by the decision to remove the public meeting. As I see it, this presents several issues for the community:
1) The Board meeting typically closes a cycle of community discussion with a vote/resolution on some issue, and these end-of-meeting Board resolutions are important. The deadline of closing an issue at a public meeting also keeps the Board on track. Do they still intend to meet and close issues? This needs to happen.
2) The public meetings became a bit of orchestrated theater over the years, but I still believe they served the purpose of showing the Board's professionalism in addressing and resolving difficult issues. Last June's meeting on New TLDs is the most recent example of this. Take a look at this picture from Singapore that ICANN features on its website: http://www.icann.org/en/about That's worth a thousand words. Note the people in the foreground using their camera phones to capture the moment. We're losing that.
3) Closing the monthly meetings while leaving these end-of-session meetings open was something of a compromise reached between a prior Board and the ICANN community many years ago. I am concerned that the Board decided to change the status quo without any notice and comment.
4) As always, ICANN is under scrutiny with the IANA bid still to be resolved and issues of transparency at the forefront of some of those discussions. The way this was handled (was there a Board resolution? Chair's decision?) only makes the optics worse. I can't seem to find any background on how this decision was made, or why it was made.
Bret _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Roberto, good to hear from you here! On 07/05/2012 21:58, Roberto Gaetano wrote :
While on the Board I have argued often that those could be written beforehand and distributed, leaving the prime time at the plenary only for questions and answers on the repor! ts. This must not necessarily take place after the public forum, and t herefore Friday, but can also take place on Thursday before the public forum
One problem I have with the Board reports/vote being done either right after the public forum or before it, is that Board members will not act directly on what they've heard in the public forum. In San Francisco, opponents to .XXX took an impressive 30 minutes to explain their case. It was fascinating to see ICANN "outsiders" put their point across to the Board and I hope that the Board took this into account in their voting the next day. I am sure much discussion took place on the Board closed meeting on Thursday night before all Board members made their choice. That said, of course, I don't believe that Board member choices were made solely on what they had heard in the public forum, but at least, the public forum was taken into account. I am not sure how this will take place now. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Both Steve Crocker [Chairman] and Bruce Tonkin [Board Member] gave some explanatory comments elsewhere. Some issues you fingered were addressed. On balance, all appeared reasonable. See under. -Carlton ----------------------------------------- Hi All, I hope the below provides some useful context for the recent improvements to ICANN meetings that will commence in Prague. (1) In the past, the Board has typically worked with staff until midnight, and in some cases 2am, on the Thursday before the Friday Board meeting to prepare resolutions for voting. This is after a busy week listening to feedback from the community, and the end result is often Board resolutions that are poorly crafted and create problems in future. (2) For Prague, the intent is that the Board will focus on listening to the community, and then in a Board/community session on Thursday give the community some idea of what future resolutions will be voted on in or actions taken in response to that feedback. A board meeting will then be held shortly after Prague to approve any necessary resolutions. (3) An example of this approach was on the topic of Conflicts of interest in Dakar in October 2011. The Board listened to the community during the week, and then in the public session on conflicts Board members gave some feedback to the community on specific measures that would be taken with respect to new gTLDs. After careful review by the legal team, and review by Board members, the Board held a meeting on 8 Dec 2011 - where a resolution was passed on managing conflicts for new gTLDs, along with other resolutions that resulted from the discussions in Dakar. (4) The Board has also been working to ensure that most resolutions at the Board level are relatively routine. This means that bodies like the ccNSO have already reached consensus on a topic or staff have managed a public comment process on a topic - and there are no controversies associated with the matter. For such routine resolutions - we either have a short teleconference or we take advantage of face-to-face time at a Board workshop to pass these resolutions. For example, at the Board workshop just concluded in Amsterdam we had a short Board meeting to pass mostly consent resolutions. It is likely that in Prague we will pass resolutions on routine matters in the Board workshop on the weekend of 23/24 June - if there are matters submitted by staff for approval - and can report on them during the public meetings. If there are controversies on a matter, the general approach would be to seek to return the matter to the relevant body or bodies to reach a stronger consensus. Thus you will see fewer matters that are not on the consent agenda at Board meetings. (5) Where there is a major policy vote, or where there are differing views on a major policy, the Board will continue to schedule such discussions for the public Board meetings. Past examples of such matters include the launch of the IDN Fast Track, .xxx decision and the approval of the new gTLD program in Singapore in June 2011. (6) With respect to transparency, the Board has been publishing rationales for each of its decisions - including those on the consent agenda. There are also detailed minutes of meetings, where contributions from Board members made during a Board meeting are captured. For example, from the minutes of the meeting on 8 Dec 2011 (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/minutes-08dec11-en.htm) there is a detailed record of the discussion on conflicts as well as on batching. (7) We are still refining improvements and certainly welcome feedback from the community. (8) It's likely that the Board/community session will be held just before the Public Forum on Thursday. Therefore it is unlikely to interfere with ccNSO WG sessions that often take place whilst the public forum is going on. ------------------------------------
From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Regarding improvements in Board processes Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 18:05:40 +0000
Hello All,
I have been reading the various comments about the announcement on 30 April 2012 that there will not be a public board meeting on Friday 29 June in Prague.
I thought I would set out various improvements being made in Board processes to set this in context.
(1) In the past, the Board has typically worked with staff until midnight, and in some cases 2am, on the Thursday before the public session to prepare resolutions for voting. This is after a busy week listening to feedback from the community, and the end result is often Board resolutions that are poorly crafted and create problems in future.
(2) For Prague, the intent is that the Board will focus on listening to the community, and then give the community some idea of what future resolutions will be voted on in response to feedback. A board meeting will then be held shortly after Prague to approve those resolutions.
(3) An example of this approach was on the topic of Conflicts of interest in Dakar in October 2011. The Board listened to the community during the week, and then in the public session on conflicts Board members gave some feedback to the community on specific measures that would be taken with respect to new gTLDs. After careful review by the legal team, and review by Board members, the Board held a meeting on 8 Dec 2011 - where a resolution was passed on managing conflicts for new gTLDs, along with other resolutions that resulted from the discussions in Dakar.
(4) The Board has also been working to ensure that most resolutions at the Board level are relatively routine. This means that bodies like the GNSO have already reached consensus on a topic (e.g the recent work on the transfers policy), or staff have managed a public comment process on a topic - and there are no controversies associated with the matter. For such routine resolutions - we either have a short teleconference or we take advantage of face-to-face time at a Board workshop to pass these resolutions. For example, at the Board workshop just concluded in Amsterdam we had a short Board meeting to pass mostly consent resolutions. It is likely that in Prague we will pass resolutions on routine matters in the Board workshop on the weekend of 23/24 June - if there are matters submitted by staff for approval - and can report on them during the public meetings. If there are controversies on a matter, the general approach would be to seek to return the matter to the relevant body or bodies to reach a stronger consensus. Thus you will see fewer matters that are not on the consent agenda at Board meetings.
(5) Where there is a major policy vote, or where there are differing views on a major policy, the Board will continue to schedule such discussions for the public meetings. Past examples of such matters include the .xxx decision and the approval of the new gTLD program in Singapore in June 2011.
(6) With respect to transparency. the Board has been publishing rationales for each of its decisions - including those on the consent agenda. There are also detailed minutes of meetings, where contributions from Board members made during a Board meeting are captured. For example, from the minutes of the meeting on 8 Dec 2011 (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/minutes-08dec11-en.htm) there is a detailed record of the discussion on conflicts as well as on batching.
(7) We are still refining improvements and certainly welcome feedback from the community.
Feel free to get in touch with me if you have any questions or concerns, and certainly feel free to provide feedback to the Board in the Board/GNSO meeting in Prague.
Also be aware that I continue to read emails on this list, and I pass on examples of emails that raise concerns about Board processes to the Board list to keep the Board aware as well.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On 05/08/2012 03:54 PM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
(6) With respect to transparency. the Board has been publishing rationales for each of its decisions
I've seen that it it does represent progress. It is ironic that when I was on the board I was severely criticized by other board members when I made it a practice of publishing the reasons for my votes when I was on the board. (These are still visible at http://www.cavebear.com/archive/icann-board/diary/index.htm ) I find it silly that ICANN continues its mode of one-week traveling circuses. This was originally adopted because "the IETF did it that way". But it evolved into a pressure-cooker week in which it is mainly the participants who meet and the ICANN board becomes nearly invisible except for a few, very few tightly scheduled "meetings" - "hearing" would be a better word as there is very little intellectual interaction, questioning, or give-and-take going on. It strikes me that the periodic week long traveling meetings no longer serve a real purpose and that a new format would better serve everyone, except the hotel, airline, food, and alcohol industries. --karl--
Olivier,Just a clarification.I wrote that the reports could be distributed beforehand and discussed (if there are any questions) back to back to the Public Forum: I maintain that this can be done without harm. The discussion/vote on substantial matters is a completely different story. I am with you in defending the lively debate that is going on at meetings, and I agree that the new format must make it possible for the Board to make a decision taking full consideration of the debate.This is an essential part of the ICANN process, and for this reason I disagree with Karl when he regards the way ICANN meeting are conducted (face-to-face rotating in different parts of the worrld) as useless. Quite the contrary, I believe that we should move towards having more interaction with the internet community worldwide, and to give more the opportunity to the Board to take decisions after having carefully taken into account the debate.Cheers,R. > Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 17:20:07 +0100
From: ocl@gih.com To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague
Dear Roberto,
good to hear from you here!
On 07/05/2012 21:58, Roberto Gaetano wrote :
While on the Board I have argued often that those could be written beforehand and distributed, leaving the prime time at the plenary only for questions and answers on the repor! ts. This must not necessarily take place after the public forum, and t herefore Friday, but can also take place on Thursday before the public forum
One problem I have with the Board reports/vote being done either right after the public forum or before it, is that Board members will not act directly on what they've heard in the public forum. In San Francisco, opponents to .XXX took an impressive 30 minutes to explain their case. It was fascinating to see ICANN "outsiders" put their point across to the Board and I hope that the Board took this into account in their voting the next day. I am sure much discussion took place on the Board closed meeting on Thursday night before all Board members made their choice. That said, of course, I don't believe that Board member choices were made solely on what they had heard in the public forum, but at least, the public forum was taken into account. I am not sure how this will take place now.
Kind regards,
Olivier
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
+ 1 ( reading reports at stage takes time should be used to answer questions) - But let´s remember , to read previously the reports, those shall not consider the F2F meeting activities ( or people would have only Thursday night to do so) Hence, asking question is the most interesting way to get knowledge about what is really going on with other groups (nobody has enough time to follow all groups) Resuming: the general reports previously sent will give you a good feeling about the 3 months activities from each group + question F@F will give you what was up dated in the meeting if you want to know about specifics issues. It is practical, saving community time - after all, that is the reason meetings exist. Best to all -----Mensagem original----- De: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Roberto Gaetano Enviada em: quarta-feira, 9 de maio de 2012 16:32 Para: At Large Assunto: Re: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague Olivier,Just a clarification.I wrote that the reports could be distributed beforehand and discussed (if there are any questions) back to back to the Public Forum: I maintain that this can be done without harm. The discussion/vote on substantial matters is a completely different story. I am with you in defending the lively debate that is going on at meetings, and I agree that the new format must make it possible for the Board to make a decision taking full consideration of the debate.This is an essential part of the ICANN process, and for this reason I disagree with Karl when he regards the way ICANN meeting are conducted (face-to-face rotating in different parts of the worrld) as useless. Quite the contrary, I believe that we should move towards having more interaction with the internet community worldwide, and to give more the opportunity to the Board to take decisions after having carefully taken into account the debate.Cheers,R. > Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 17:20:07 +0100
From: ocl@gih.com To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague
Dear Roberto,
good to hear from you here!
On 07/05/2012 21:58, Roberto Gaetano wrote :
While on the Board I have argued often that those could be written beforehand and distributed, leaving the prime time at the plenary only for questions and answers on the repor! ts. This must not necessarily take place after the public forum, and t herefore Friday, but can also take place on Thursday before the public forum
One problem I have with the Board reports/vote being done either right after the public forum or before it, is that Board members will not act directly on what they've heard in the public forum. In San Francisco, opponents to .XXX took an impressive 30 minutes to explain their case. It was fascinating to see ICANN "outsiders" put their point across to the Board and I hope that the Board took this into account in their voting the next day. I am sure much discussion took place on the Board closed meeting on Thursday night before all Board members made their choice. That said, of course, I don't believe that Board member choices were made solely on what they had heard in the public forum, but at least, the public forum was taken into account. I am not sure how this will take place now.
Kind regards,
Olivier
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
On 05/09/2012 01:31 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
...I disagree with Karl when he regards the way ICANN meeting are conducted (face-to-face rotating in different parts of the worrld) as useless. Quite the contrary, I believe that we should move towards having more interaction with the internet community worldwide...
That's not quite what I said (or if I did say it, it wasn't what I meant). The point is that ICANN spends its week long meetings on stuff that could occur separately. The real thing that needs to occur at these meetings is exactly what you want - conversations, by which I mean two way exchanges - between the community of internet community and the decisionmakers in ICANN, mainly the members of the board or staff members who have discretionary powers to make choices. I do not buy the logic that the board is too pressed for time that they can't have long conversations, en banc, with the community. The problem is that ICANN does not manage its staff to prepare matters sufficiently in advance and leaves it to "the night before". That is simply sloppy management of staff and reflects poorly on ICANN's executive management and the board's oversight of that management. When I was on that board I felt that it was part of my role to actively engage with the community - which is why during the weekly meetings I sat in public places to encourage easy conversations; which is why I kept a rather public diary of my decisions - for which I got a lot of very negative push back from other board members; and which is why I asked questions and follow-up questions during board meetings - again for which I frequently received negative push back. ICANN's decision makers spend too much time listening and not enough time asking. The issues that face us are not perfectly well articulated and it is often through interaction that the real agreements and disagreements are revealed and solutions become apparent. For this reason I would like ICANN to vastly expand its board-public interface so that its meetings comprise days, not hours, of back-forth-conversations between the community and the board members separately and the board as a body. And when I say "back-forth" or "conversational" I really mean it - the board and executive ICANN staff ought to make serious efforts to be active participants in a two-say dialog rather than silent statues on a dais who may be listening, maybe not, who may be understanding, maybe not. Moreover, in these days of electronics and cheap memory there is no reason - except fear of being heard - for ICANN not to put a full audio/video recording of *every* meeting of the board and board committee except for those matters that a majority of the board, in public, agrees are related to personnel matters, contract negotiation, or ongoing or reasonably anticipated specific litigation. Most of week-long meetings is spent in matters that are among special-interest groups and could be held elsewhere or on their own time; in fact it would be good if they were held more than a week in advance so that any results of those meetings could be properly packaged so that their contents could be properly digested by the time the plenary meetings were held. If the rationale for the traveling meetings is to engage the local community of internet users than it stands to reason that those groups that show up every time - by which I mean the often rather well heeled registry/registrar, trademark, and similar groups - ought to receive less emphasis and the time thus recovered be dedicated to interaction with those who are not world jet-setting travelers. --karl--
It occurs that I've not been to ICANN physically for over ten years now. Does this change mean that taking questions from the floor will cease? That was about the most useful thing in ICANN meetings to have the board interacting with attendees directly for at least one session. Christian On 2 May 2012, at 12:50, Adam Peake wrote:
I am in two minds about this. If the board is transparent in all its meetings, and increasingly it is trying to be, then ending a day early might work well. The meetings are starting earlier, I think most of us (except perhaps when the meeting's in our region) start to travel on a working day before the formal week of a meeting and often get back on a Sunday or later. For the board it's becoming almost 2 weeks. We're a volunteer community that's perhaps asking too much of our employers. And I don't know how staff manage, from 7 to late for over a week (jet lagged.)
But. Loosing reports from the SOs and ACs matters (even at 8am...) Important that reports are read into the record, and important the directors sitting formally as the board are to be able to ask questions, the community also.
And the Board meeting isn't just a show. Important comments often made. I recently had reason to refer to Mike Silber's comments on outreach made during the board meeting (attached). A statement much more powerful because it was made during an on record meeting of the board rather than teleconference or at the public forum. Would be a terrible to loose this.
And thanking people --outgoing volunteers, the hosts-- is an important formality.
If 3 or 4 hours on Friday is lost, where can it be squeezed during the week?
Mike Palage noted there were 3 other board meetings during the Costa Rica meeting (minutes etc online). The board has an enormous amount for work to do. But if they meet when scribing's available, they should make use of it (we don't even have to be in the room, anyone with a laptop/smart phone can follow the text stream).
Might be the right decision, but some public discussion before it was taken would have been helpful. And if's to happen, then transcripts of all board meetings please.
Adam
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> wrote:
Dear all, I am on your side on that matter. I am still struggling with this issue on the Board. I hope that part of the situation is a missing piece in the communication but not sure 100%. A public board meeting will take place during the week (if subject matter). All the best Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com>
Le 02/05/12 00:54, « Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond » <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear all,
I indeed had been asked about this and forwarded an enquiry to the ALAC working list. http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002011.html
But I was not able to get back to the Board with the views of our community (rather than my own views) before their announcement. I had no idea they were going to proceed without a proper consultation with the community.
Kind regards,
Olivier
On 01/05/2012 03:03, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote :
Dear All,
I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ???
Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org <Silber-Dakar-new-gTLD.doc>_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Hi, No, they do not seem to have canceled the open fora. At least, not yet. Who knows what they will find superfluous next? avri On 4 May 2012, at 04:05, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
It occurs that I've not been to ICANN physically for over ten years now. Does this change mean that taking questions from the floor will cease? That was about the most useful thing in ICANN meetings to have the board interacting with attendees directly for at least one session.
Christian
On 2 May 2012, at 12:50, Adam Peake wrote:
I am in two minds about this. If the board is transparent in all its meetings, and increasingly it is trying to be, then ending a day early might work well. The meetings are starting earlier, I think most of us (except perhaps when the meeting's in our region) start to travel on a working day before the formal week of a meeting and often get back on a Sunday or later. For the board it's becoming almost 2 weeks. We're a volunteer community that's perhaps asking too much of our employers. And I don't know how staff manage, from 7 to late for over a week (jet lagged.)
But. Loosing reports from the SOs and ACs matters (even at 8am...) Important that reports are read into the record, and important the directors sitting formally as the board are to be able to ask questions, the community also.
And the Board meeting isn't just a show. Important comments often made. I recently had reason to refer to Mike Silber's comments on outreach made during the board meeting (attached). A statement much more powerful because it was made during an on record meeting of the board rather than teleconference or at the public forum. Would be a terrible to loose this.
And thanking people --outgoing volunteers, the hosts-- is an important formality.
If 3 or 4 hours on Friday is lost, where can it be squeezed during the week?
Mike Palage noted there were 3 other board meetings during the Costa Rica meeting (minutes etc online). The board has an enormous amount for work to do. But if they meet when scribing's available, they should make use of it (we don't even have to be in the room, anyone with a laptop/smart phone can follow the text stream).
Might be the right decision, but some public discussion before it was taken would have been helpful. And if's to happen, then transcripts of all board meetings please.
Adam
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> wrote:
Dear all, I am on your side on that matter. I am still struggling with this issue on the Board. I hope that part of the situation is a missing piece in the communication but not sure 100%. A public board meeting will take place during the week (if subject matter). All the best Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com>
Le 02/05/12 00:54, « Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond » <ocl@gih.com> a écrit :
Dear all,
I indeed had been asked about this and forwarded an enquiry to the ALAC working list. http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002011.html
But I was not able to get back to the Board with the views of our community (rather than my own views) before their announcement. I had no idea they were going to proceed without a proper consultation with the community.
Kind regards,
Olivier
On 01/05/2012 03:03, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote :
Dear All,
I recall the Chair suggesting the removal of Friday and in a sense as Chair/Director he does have the authority to restructure or reformat the meeting style but would have thought that since it involves a wide range of stakeholders that there should have been some level of consultation on that. Maybe there were consultations but I missed it ???
Part of "transparency" is the ability for the public to see the nuances from body language whilst communicating.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>wrote:
I agree with you Carlton.
Sure, the hard decisions were already decided "behind the scenes" so that there were no surprises. And yes, I suppose the board meeting transcript of such a ICANN Board meeting held after the conference can be done.
But not seeing the body language of the ICANN Board as they explained their decisions on key issues in the history of ICANN (e.g .XXX , the launch of the new gTLD program) and also the sense of what the community felt as they listened to the statements, is lost.
Hopefully, important issues to be decided by the ICANN Board would be done by special ICANN Board meetings such as the one held on Monday during the Singapore meeting, when the implementation of the new gTLD program was approved.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual > 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting. > > Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough > with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally > intended; > theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role. > > First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder > organisation and > while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was > an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having > regard > the global public interest. > > Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an > outside > chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of > participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always > straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever > mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the > voice of > Jacob'. > > I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. > It > was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told > a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. > Aferall, > the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, > it is instructive. > > - Carlton Samuels > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > ============================= > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org <Silber-Dakar-new-gTLD.doc>_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Carlton, I widely agree with you. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Vice Président de la CIC Fédération Mondiale des Organisations dIngénieurs Téléphone : + 216 70 825 231 Tél Mobile : + 216 98 330 114 Télécopie : + 216 70 825 231 ---------------------------------------------------------------- -----Message d'origine----- De : at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Carlton Samuels Envoyé : mardi 1 mai 2012 00:00 À : At-Large Worldwide; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Objet : [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting. Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role. First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest. Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'. I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive. - Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org ----- Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message. Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 10.0.1390 / Base de données virale: 1518/3785 - Date: 24/07/2011 La Base de données des virus a expiré.
I agree with Carlton. Although about 75% of the board meetings are boring, there have definitely been a few interesting ones where you could see the Board Member's body language and personality shine through (.xxx, new gTLDs, and a few others). When its a hot topic, the Board meetings are very insightful. D Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator N-CAP/Department of Education P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca ________________________________________ From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Carlton Samuels [carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 6:59 PM To: At-Large Worldwide; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting. Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role. First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest. Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'. I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive. - Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
I agree that this is a loss of transparency and find the decision deplorable. It is another step in the wrong direction for a institution that is supposedly committed to increasing transparency for its multistakeholder participants. And to make such a decision without even consulting the community, yet another example of the trend toward the Imperial Board. It is a pity. avri On 3 May 2012, at 13:05, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
I agree with Carlton. Although about 75% of the board meetings are boring, there have definitely been a few interesting ones where you could see the Board Member's body language and personality shine through (.xxx, new gTLDs, and a few others). When its a hot topic, the Board meetings are very insightful.
D
Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator N-CAP/Department of Education P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca ________________________________________ From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Carlton Samuels [carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 6:59 PM To: At-Large Worldwide; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague
I'm sure I may be in the minority to bemoan the passing of the usual 'public' Friday morning ICANN Board meeting.
Let us be clear I'm not just hopped off the truck here. I'm familiar enough with these matters to recognize it for what it is principally intended; theatre. But in the ICANN context, even crafted theatre has its role.
First, I truly believe that for a claimed multistakeholder organisation and while the 'public' board meeting may not have been all it could be, it was an important indicator or attribute of the MSM, especially having regard the global public interest.
Secondly, even if the votes are already taken, there existed an outside chance that one may witness truly revealing 'body language' of participants. Maybe its because for most of my life I have always straddled several socio-political realities. But I am socialized to be ever mindful that one may 'feel the hand of Esau even as you hear the voice of Jacob'.
I can still hear Susan Crawford's cathartic farewell speech in 2008. It was remarkable, the response in body language of several board members told a story. I will concede it may not mean much, then and there. Aferall, the deed is done and the die is cast. But when the 'fire next time' comes, it is instructive.
- Carlton Samuels
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
participants (16)
-
Adam Peake -
Avri Doria -
Bret Fausett -
Carlton Samuels -
Christian de Larrinaga -
Dev Anand Teelucksingh -
Jacqueline Morris -
Karl Auerbach -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Roberto Gaetano -
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro -
sylvia＠prontocl.com.br -
Sébastien Bachollet -
Thompson, Darlene -
tijani.benjemaa＠planet.tn -
Vanda UOL