I echo Chuck's concerns in this regard, for reasons similar to what I just outlined in my last email regarding secret ballots. At the same time, I take Mike's point that we should try to maximize Council time and efficiency, particularly when we've got so much on our collective plates at this time. I don't mean to presume on the Chair's duties, but would it be possible to control the time in such a way as to effect this? Perhaps by limiting the number of representatives of each self-identified interest group who wishes to speak? Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
"Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> 10/15/2009 11:48 AM >>>
Mike, I think we have to be very careful about keeping our processes open, so I would have a concern in that regard. On another note, it seems to me that our first order of business regarding the Board letter should be to develop a process for doing the work they request us to do. I think it would be premature and ineffective to start discussing the issues until be have a process in place. There will be opportunities in ICANN workshops during the week to discuss the issues. Before we develop a process, it would be helpful to make sure we understand the request thoroughly, so an interaction with Denise and possibly a representative from the Board could be a good start. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:35 AM To: 'Council GNSO' Subject: RE: [council] Board letter to GNSO Council
Seems the Board has set this as a top priority for the Council, obviously. So we should setup a long block of time on Sat/Sun in Seoul to kick this off?
I have concerns about allowing 'observers' to speak freely at the Council sessions, as has become standard practice at our weekend sessions but at no other times. It makes the weekend sessions far less productive, more time consuming and more contentious than warranted. It allows a few well-funded members of the community to have far undue influence over Council deliberations and policy development. With specific respect to the IRT proposals, it will simply allow rehash of all the arguments we have heard for months and over several meetings, at the expense of actual Council deliberations and progress towards policy development.
Of course observers are welcome, but they ought not be allowed to speak except during designated Q&A or presentation periods as during our Wednesday session. If councilors wish to proxy their speaking privilege in any session, that ought to be allowed, but there ought be no more people allowed to speak than there are Councilors.
Do others agree or disagree with this?
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW 548 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 738-8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 7:30 AM To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Board letter to GNSO Council
We discussed this some in our RySG call yesterday. The one clear position that was made is that the process should follow the practice we have been following in recent months and years to NOT restrict participation to just Councilors.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:22 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Board letter to GNSO Council
Hi,
Was just asked during another meeting whether there was any idea of what kind of work the Council would be engaged in in order to meet the Board deadline on this.
I had to admit that we wee still too busy on the transition details to have discussed this at all on the list.
I would like to invite the council to begin considering how you want to handle this. Hopefully discussions have already begun in the SGs.
One note: if we wait until the new council is seated to start dealing with this we will have used one week of the council 8 weeks to get it done.
a.