Hi Gabi,

I have a strong concern that the proposed text gives the impression that
we are seeking to limit this aspect of the ccNSO work.

As many Councillors will recall, a number of the recommendations on their
way from the Participation WG (when I find the capacity to finish the
final report) are about improving the value of the ccNSO and ccNSO
meetings to ccTLD managers.

Providing an improved structure for this information exchange is good, but
by only allocating 50 minutes for this (which is what your email seems to
suggest) would not seem to be so good.

Regards,

Lesley

owner-ccnso-council@icann.org wrote on 28/11/2008 08:34:47:

>
> Dear Councillors,
>
> Below is some text which I was planning to send out to the members
> list regarding the ccTLD update session during the ccNSO meetings.
> Should you have any objections or concerns, please, let me know by
> Tuesday, 2nd December.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gabi
>
> --
>
> Dear all,
>
> The ccTLD Update session is an important part of the ccNSO meeting
> agenda where the participants have a chance to learn more about
> ccTLDs from around the world. However, as we have more and more
> interested speakers for this session, we felt that we need to give
> it a slight structure.
>
> For the upcoming ccNSO meeting in Mexico and following ccNSO
> meetings, we are therefore suggesting following format:
>
> - Presentations from ccTLDs which have something to report on new
> developments within their registry will be prioritised, but we can
> only allow for three such presentations.
> - "Status update" presentations will be limited to a maximum of two
> speakers per meeting. Preference will be given to registries that
> have not given any update within the last 12 months.
> - Each presenter will have 10 minutes for their presentation.
>
> We regret that we need to put a limit on the number of
> presentations, however, we hope you understand that these changes
> are necessary in order to be able to use the meeting time as
> efficiently as possible.
>