Thanks Wolf, I think that's the way we've all been coping up until now anyway. I fear that may no longer be enough... Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France ---------------- Head of Domain Operations Group NBT Le 7 juin 2012 à 09:11, <KnobenW@telekom.de> <KnobenW@telekom.de> a écrit :
Thanks Stéphane for "raising this issue" (a PDP with heavy documentation to be read has to follow :-)).
I see only one way to cope with these growing challenges: - Just read the summary conclusion of the doc's - decide whether it touches your SGs/constituency's interest and allocate it to somebody in this group having some expertise (maybe it comes down to yourself). NCA's may have a real problem... - if you're more interested read the recommendations - trust yourself that you did the right thing
Best regards Wolf-Ulrich
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Stéphane Van Gelder Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Juni 2012 12:25 An: GNSO Council List Betreff: [council] Managing the run-up to ICANN meetings
Hi all,
In the interest of full transparency, I wanted to inform you of a Circle ID article that I wrote: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20120605_icann_gets_crazy_again/
You've heard me speak of the potential for volunteer burn-out many times in the past. You've also heard me moan about the lack of pre-planning on document roll out by ICANN. This post is also voicing my opinion that the current trend is making it difficult for volunteer bodies like ours to adequately look at all issues when making policy.
In actual fact, my main worry is with the Board. I am told that they get about 3 times the volume of documents to read in the run-up to ICANN meetings that we as community members get. So does that mean we're asking Board members to get to grips with so much reports and briefings and documents, and then expecting them to make quality decisions? If that's the case, I think we are asking too much of them.
I note with interest a couple of the comments posted in response to this article. Avri's comments, for example, rightly point out that some of these reports do not require us to read every single page. However, I do think that is an insider's POV, and one that is deeply involved with ICANN like Avri is and has her depth of knowledge of the issues. I would wager that with so much going on, most of us need to read a full report just to remind ourselves of the subject matter's past history.
I was also interested to read Kieren's comments, because I think he hits the nail on the head when he says that because there is a 15-day deadline for document publication, everything tends to come out on that deadline. I agree with him that if we are able to plan ahead more and better pre-plan, we would not end up with more than 700 pages of reading to do before we all congregate for what remains the most important item on the ICANN yearly calendar: the ICANN meeting. After all, it is in these face-to-face meetings that a lot of the crucial ICANN decisions get shaped, if not taken, so it is important that they are based on people having had sufficient time to take in and digest the documents that provide the context for them.
I hope you do not feel this email is off topic. I think this is at the heart of what we do at ICANN, which is to constantly strive to do the best we can when weighing the issues that we deal with at ICANN.
I would love to hear your views on this, not just as a Council, but also as individual ICANN volunteers who all have to face the same problems that are being described here: that of what bandwidth you have available to deal with ICANN-related stuff in a way which you feel does credit to the organization and what it is tasked with doing.
Thanks,
Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France ---------------- Head of Domain Operations Group NBT