Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Could we just identify a topic or two each and canvass among our SGs? Rosemary Sent from my BlackBerry® from Optus -----Original Message----- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Sender: <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 01:00:27 To: Adrian Kinderis<adrian@ausregistry.com.au>; Bruce Tonkin<Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>; GNSO Council<council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels Please ignore my earlier question about what we would survey Adrian. The following answers my question. Any volunteers to take a first crack at a survey that we can discuss on the list? Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 9:38 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Thanks Bruce. This is helpful.
I like to see a way that we can move away from anecdotal opinions towards firm requests from the Board members as to their want/ need to meet with the GNSO. Is there a way that we could actually survey them with a list of options and ensure we get the right mix of engagement?
There is a danger that we are catering for the vocal majority.
Thanks.
Adrian Kinderis
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Friday, 21 May 2010 11:12 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Hello All,
I think the approach you suggest for the Board dinner is excellent. To me, these dinners are crucial for us and the opportunity for interaction with Board members they bring. I would hate to see them disappear, but would like to understand why some on the Board feel they should go.
Well here are some issues that get raised:
- the dinners are at the end of a long day of workshops/meetings - so some members are too tired to give important matters appropriate attention
- it is not always clear what the objective is - a general discussion about topics, a social event, discussion about a specific issues that the Board will be making a decision on that week?
- if the process is working properly - the Board will simply be endorsing the recommendations from the Council that have consensus support and should not be getting into the detail of particular policy matters. If there is disagreement amongst the parties in the GNSO - the GNSO should work it out together - not try to get the Board to take sides.
There are some that would prefer a more formal meeting - not aligned with a breakfast/lunch or dinner - where there are materials provided in advance and the Board members can ask questions about the particular issue.
Personally I think a mixture of formal and informal can work. e.g A period of time for a structured discussion with documents provided in advance, and the ability for the Board to ask questions on the documents. An informal eating occasion can then follow that is perhaps optional for the participants to attend to get a better understanding of the issues. This structure used to work quite well when we were doing the new gTLD policy development - the days were spent on policy discussions, and the dinners were an opportunity to break down some barriers in the discussions with no formal agenda, that often led to better results the following day.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
I am accumulating the various ideas and comments and will send a summary to the Council list that will helpfully facilitate discussion with SGs and Constituencies as well as among the Council members. Chuck From: rosemary.sinclair@atug.org.au [mailto:rosemary.sinclair@atug.org.au] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 11:48 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; owner-council@gnso.icann.org; Adrian Kinderis; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels Could we just identify a topic or two each and canvass among our SGs? Rosemary Sent from my BlackBerry(r) from Optus ________________________________ From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Sender: <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 01:00:27 +1000 To: Adrian Kinderis<adrian@ausregistry.com.au>; Bruce Tonkin<Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>; GNSO Council<council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels Please ignore my earlier question about what we would survey Adrian. The following answers my question. Any volunteers to take a first crack at a survey that we can discuss on the list? Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 9:38 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Thanks Bruce. This is helpful.
I like to see a way that we can move away from anecdotal opinions towards firm requests from the Board members as to their want/ need to meet with the GNSO. Is there a way that we could actually survey them with a list of options and ensure we get the right mix of engagement?
There is a danger that we are catering for the vocal majority.
Thanks.
Adrian Kinderis
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Friday, 21 May 2010 11:12 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Hello All,
I think the approach you suggest for the Board dinner is excellent. To me, these dinners are crucial for us and the opportunity for interaction with Board members they bring. I would hate to see them disappear, but would like to understand why some on the Board feel they should go.
Well here are some issues that get raised:
- the dinners are at the end of a long day of workshops/meetings - so some members are too tired to give important matters appropriate attention
- it is not always clear what the objective is - a general discussion about topics, a social event, discussion about a specific issues that the Board will be making a decision on that week?
- if the process is working properly - the Board will simply be endorsing the recommendations from the Council that have consensus support and should not be getting into the detail of particular policy matters. If there is disagreement amongst the parties in the GNSO - the GNSO should work it out together - not try to get the Board to take sides.
There are some that would prefer a more formal meeting - not aligned with a breakfast/lunch or dinner - where there are materials provided in advance and the Board members can ask questions about the particular issue.
Personally I think a mixture of formal and informal can work. e.g A period of time for a structured discussion with documents provided in advance, and the ability for the Board to ask questions on the documents. An informal eating occasion can then follow that is perhaps optional for the participants to attend to get a better understanding of the issues. This structure used to work quite well when we were doing the new gTLD policy development - the days were spent on policy discussions, and the dinners were an opportunity to break down some barriers in the discussions with no formal agenda, that often led to better results the following day.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
participants (2)
-
Gomes, Chuck -
rosemary.sinclair＠atug.org.au