Dear Eberhard Thank you for your feedback on the council workshop and I am adding the Council mailing list in copy. I appreciate your point with respect to the late start and I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. With respect to the session itself I want to make a few observations to provide more context: - This session was intended to solicit different perspectives, from Councillors and community members, on how they look at the effectiveness and efficiency of ccNSO's policy work and how it could be improved. - The past Council workshop was the first time we could have such a discussion looking at a concluded ccPDP. - I trust we will continue this matter and further analysis will be undertaken. - As stated it was NOT intended as an evaluation of the process of the development of the retirement policy, which is first and foremost a matter of the working group developing the policy. As to the session itself, this was organized by an ad-hoc committee of the Council, which included the Chair of the Retirement working group. I leave it up to this group whether they want to comment on your feed-back. Best regards, Alejandra ******************************************* Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance like nobody's watching. Sing like nobody's listening. And live like it's Heaven on Earth. ******************************************* On 17/11/2022, 21:37, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el@lisse.NA> wrote: Alejandra, This format of this did not work for me at all. Throwing a few virtual post-its around without taking into consideration whether the points were made were made by actual members of the group or others (ie lacking insight into the operation of the Wg) does not help. Neither do some very outlandish suggestions making it onto those post-its by a participant (ie not a member) of the WG. I am not objecting to the suggestions per se (this is "electronic brainstorming" after all, but the lack of reflection applied to any of them in any analysis. I do not believe that a quantitative approach to comments in order to change ccNSO working methodology is too simplistic for the importance of this. I was VERY disturbed by the summary termination of the workshop at the top of the hour (after the Council Call encroached on the allocated time), which I find disrespectful to those volunteers who attended out of hours, and reduces this exercise to something akin to ticking a box. I am not sure I am willing to participate in something like this in or out of hours again. The one issue that really irritated me during the process of developing the policy, was a Council Member (not participating in the Wg) making some really strong remarks about the length we were taking (if I recall correctly on one of the pre-Covid meetings). I must confess that I could at the time barely be restrained by the Wg's chair from esablishing whether that was in line with accepted norms of behaviour in the ICANN context. Since the Council member was present during today's Zoom call I had wanted to address that point for and on the record. Since I can not post to the Council List and don't have a list of non Council Members participating, I trust you bring this email to the attention of everyone who was on the Zoom call. The two chairs of the Wg read in copy. el -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 Bachbrecht \ / If this email is signed with GPG/PGP 10007, Namibia ;____/ Sect 20 of Act No. 4 of 2019 may apply