Comments
on proposed incremental changes to the ICANN Meeting strategy by Michelle
Chaplow
I was privileged to be a member of the ICANN
Meetings Strategy Working Group (MSWG) in 2014.
I understand that the purpose of this comment
period is focused, and limited, however I would like to make a comment regarding
remote participation, that I believe
would be of help to the ICANN meetings.
Without doubt attending an ICANN meeting in
person is a far superior experience to remote participation, however satellite
hub meetings, held at other locations around the world, could offer a cost-effective
remote participation solution.
The advantages main of remote hubs in my opinion
are:
It´s relatively cost effective, maybe one room
for 30-40 people?
It provides local outreach opportunities for all
constituencies.
I know myself that with pure remote
participation, it’s very difficult to be fully immersed with the distraction of
parallel day-to-day business activity; this option would provide a focused
environment.
ICANN would have the participation of community
members that otherwise would not be able to attend.
Unfortunately The MSWG did not have the time to
effectively peruse this idea.
My recommendation is that strategic remote hubs,
during ICANN meetings, should be evaluated, then tried and tested.
31 Jan 2018