- comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17@icann.org

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Ratified: ALAC Statement on Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 8, 2018

Feb. 8, 2018

Dear All, Kindly find attached the ratified ALAC Statement on Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. Content of the statement is unchanged. Ratification information has been included on the cover page. ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Website: atlarge.icann.org<http://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icannatlarge<http://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @ICANNAtLarge<http://www.twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [ignature_262798721]

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] NCSG comment on incremental changes to ICANN meetings strategy
by Rafik Dammak Feb. 7, 2018

Feb. 7, 2018

Hi, please find attached NCSG comment on incremental changes to ICANN meetings strategy Best Regards, Rafik

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] RrSG Response to Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by Zoe Bonython Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

Hello, On behalf of the Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG), I’d like to submit the following comment on the ‘Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy’: The RrSG takes this opportunity to comment upon some of the proposals contained in the Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. A majority of members of the RrSG has attended these meetings at various times. The RrSG considers that some of the Group’s concerns may not have been adequately dealt with in the recommendations of the Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG). We have two points to make: Duration of meetings Given ICANN’s budgetary concerns, it seems appropriate to reduce the total number of days spent in meetings. A 7 day meeting effectively becomes 9 days, as it’ll usually involve a day of travel on either side. In addition there are often add on meetings held prior to the main meeting. Under labour law in many jurisdictions this is highly problematic as we cannot oblige employees to work for more than 7 days consecutively. Having such long meetings also often necessitates people having the miss days, leaving those with greater resource (such as larger companies and lobbyists) being more likely to actually be able to attend the full meeting. Accordingly, a seven day-long annual general meeting could be reduced, at least to six days. The Annual General Meeting (AGM) Further thought should be given to the use of day seven of the AGM. Time spent in face to face meetings is precious to have and expensive for all parties to procure. If the seventh day is to be retained, more thought should be given to how that day is to be used effectively. Kind regards, Zoe Bonython RrSG Secretariat

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] GNSO Council Comments to the Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by Steve Chan Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

Dear All, On behalf of the GNSO Council, please find its comments on the Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. Best regards, GNSO Policy Support Staff

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Business Constituency (BC) comment on Proposed Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by Steve DelBianco Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

The ICANN Business Constituency (BC) submits the attached comment on Proposed Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. ( ICANN comment page at https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-changes-meetings-strategy-20… ) This comment was drafted by Marilyn Cade, Arinola Akinyemi, Michelle Chaplow, Christian Bope, and Tola Sogbesan, and edited by Steve DelBianco. It was approved in accord with the BC Charter. — Steve DelBianco Vice chair for policy coordination ICANN Business Constituency

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by Austin, Donna Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

Please find attached Neustar Inc. comments on the Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. Donna Austin Neustar, Inc. / Senior Policy Manager, Registry Solutions Mobile: +1 310 890 9655 donna.austin(a)team.neustar<mailto:donna.austin@team.neustar> / Website: home.neustar<http://www.home.neustar/> Follow Neustar: LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349> / Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar> Reduce your environmental footprint. Print only if necessary. ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Comments-icann-meetings-strategy
by Michelle Chaplow Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

Commentson proposed incremental changes to the ICANN Meeting strategy by MichelleChaplow I was privileged to be a member of the ICANNMeetings Strategy Working Group (MSWG) in 2014. I understand that the purpose of this commentperiod is focused, and limited, however I would like to make a comment regardingremote participation, that I believewould be of help to the ICANN meetings. Without doubt attending an ICANN meeting inperson is a far superior experience to remote participation, however satellitehub meetings, held at other locations around the world, could offer a cost-effectiveremote participation solution. The advantages main of remote hubs in my opinionare: It´s relatively cost effective, maybe one roomfor 30-40 people? It provides local outreach opportunities for allconstituencies. I know myself that with pure remoteparticipation, it’s very difficult to be fully immersed with the distraction ofparallel day-to-day business activity; this option would provide a focusedenvironment. ICANN would have the participation of communitymembers that otherwise would not be able to attend. Unfortunately The MSWG did not have the time toeffectively peruse this idea. My recommendation is that strategic remote hubs,during ICANN meetings, should be evaluated, then tried and tested. 31 Jan 2018

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Comment from Alan Greenberg
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

This comment is submitted on my own behalf only, and is not a formal statement of the ALAC. Community Forum: No change Policy Forum: I support a change to five days since operating in 4 had been rather problematic. Although I support a recommendation that AC/SOs consider using this additional day for outreach, I do not support making this mandatory. Even in a group that supports dedicating time solely to outreach, not all of their participants may be involved. I believe the logistics of identifying exactly what that outreach will be and who will participate to be impractical given that it would have to be done PRIOR to starting travel arrangements. Therefore I strongly suggest that each community divide their time as appropriate to allow their outreach efforts in parallel with policy discussions. AGM: I support keeping the meeting at 7 days, but making it clear that day 7 is for AC/SO meetings, some of which may be closed and that ICANN attendees verify with their AC/SO whether there will be any public meetings. Alan Greenberg

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Ratification Pending: ALAC Statement on Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 1, 2018

Feb. 1, 2018

Dear All, Kindly find attached the ALAC Statement on Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. In the interest of time, the ALAC Chair requested that the Statement be transmitted to the ICANN public comment process with a note that the Statement is pending ALAC ratification. ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Website: atlarge.icann.org<http://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icannatlarge<http://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @ICANNAtLarge<http://www.twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [ignature_312745457]

1 0

[Comments-icann-meetings-strategy-14dec17] Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) comments on Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy
by Stéphane Van Gelder - Milathan Jan. 31, 2018

Jan. 31, 2018

Please find attached, in PDF format, the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) comments on Proposed Incremental Changes to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. In the interest of time, the RySG did not conduct a formal vote on these comments. They were circulated and debated on our mailing list, with no member expressing opposition to their submission. Please do not hesitate to contact me or any member of the RySG Executive Committee should you have any questions. Best regards, Stéphane Van Gelder RySG Vice Chair (Policy)

1 0