Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
It is time for us to start thinking about discussion topics for our three regular joint meetings in Brussels: 1) GAC/GNSO meeting; 2) Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting; and 3) ccNSO/GNSO meeting. To get discussion going, I listed some ideas below. GAC/GNSO meeting Janis suggested the following with my comments in parentheses: * DAG 4, including morality and public order (could be a lively discussion) * AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews * RAA (I believe that this is one where there is common interest in discussing) * IDN ccPDP (I don't think this is very useful from a GNSO point of view, but maybe I am missing something) Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting * There are rumblings that there are some on the Board who think this meeting has outlived its usefulness; in light of that, it might be useful to discuss the value or lack of value from both the GNSO and Board/Staff perspective. ccNSO/GNSO meeting * DNS-CERT Please comment on the above and feel free to suggest new topics. I promised Janis and Chris I would get back to them. Thanks, Chuck
Chuck, 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. Stéphane Le 21 mai 2010 à 02:18, Gomes, Chuck a écrit :
It is time for us to start thinking about discussion topics for our three regular joint meetings in Brussels: 1) GAC/GNSO meeting; 2) Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting; and 3) ccNSO/GNSO meeting. To get discussion going, I listed some ideas below.
GAC/GNSO meeting
Janis suggested the following with my comments in parentheses:
· DAG 4, including morality and public order (could be a lively discussion)
· AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews
· RAA (I believe that this is one where there is common interest in discussing)
· IDN ccPDP (I don’t think this is very useful from a GNSO point of view, but maybe I am missing something)
Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting
· There are rumblings that there are some on the Board who think this meeting has outlived its usefulness; in light of that, it might be useful to discuss the value or lack of value from both the GNSO and Board/Staff perspective.
ccNSO/GNSO meeting
· DNS-CERT
Please comment on the above and feel free to suggest new topics. I promised Janis and Chris I would get back to them.
Thanks, Chuck
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
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
Hello Adrian,
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?
Ah you mean data driven studies. I will ask the staff to get a quote for a marketing survey - might cost about $200,000. Alternatively - if the Council wishes to put together a simple survey I will be happy to distribute to Board members. There has only really been mailing list chatter at the Board level - so no formal position on this topic. Regards, Bruce
Thanks Bruce. That just made my day... Chuck, is this something we can do? 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 11:48 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels Hello Adrian,
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?
Ah you mean data driven studies. I will ask the staff to get a quote for a marketing survey - might cost about $200,000. Alternatively - if the Council wishes to put together a simple survey I will be happy to distribute to Board members. There has only really been mailing list chatter at the Board level - so no formal position on this topic. Regards, Bruce
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 9:51 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Thanks Bruce. That just made my day...
Chuck, is this something we can do?
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 11:48 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
Hello Adrian,
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
I don't see why not Adrian. I am not totally clear on what we would survey. What are you thinking? Chuck them
with a list of options and ensure we get the right mix of engagement?
Ah you mean data driven studies. I will ask the staff to get a quote for a marketing survey - might cost about $200,000.
Alternatively - if the Council wishes to put together a simple survey I will be happy to distribute to Board members.
There has only really been mailing list chatter at the Board level - so no formal position on this topic.
Regards, Bruce
Hello All, Just to be clear that I personally think the dinners between the Board and the GNSO Council are important. They build mutual trust, and encourage more open conversation on important issues. When I was chair, I established the DNSO/GNSO Council/Board dinners. The format has changed over time - and various things have been tried by me, Avri and Chuck - but whatever the format the opportunity to actually talk to each other is important. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
-----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
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 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
-----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
And of course I meant the vocal minority... hehehe! Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: Saturday, 22 May 2010 12:26 AM To: Adrian Kinderis; Bruce Tonkin; GNSO Council 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 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
We are talking about the interaction between 2 of ICANN's major decision-making bodies. I think it's important to keep sight of the usefulness of getting the people from each body talking to each other. Even when there's no formal agenda, this type of interaction helps make organisations work. Yes we can keep it formal, but when it's a social event it's often easier for people to meet and get to know each other. That then translates into real benefits for the organisation when it comes to formal work sessions. As a new councillor, I found the first Board dinner I attended helped take away a lot of the awe and stress I felt at both learning the Council and working with the Board. From informal conversations with Board members, I found them to be much more approachable and in tune with the everyday problems ICANN faces than I had thought. I would never have gotten that in a more formal setting. I think our joint dinner are an investment we all make to help oil the internal workings of the organisation. Stéphane Le 21 mai 2010 à 15:11, Bruce Tonkin a écrit :
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
Hi On May 21, 2010, at 2:18 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
It is time for us to start thinking about discussion topics for our three regular joint meetings in Brussels: 1) GAC/GNSO meeting; 2) Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting; and 3) ccNSO/GNSO meeting. To get discussion going, I listed some ideas below.
GAC/GNSO meeting
Janis suggested the following with my comments in parentheses:
· DAG 4, including morality and public order (could be a lively discussion)
· AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews
· RAA (I believe that this is one where there is common interest in discussing)
· IDN ccPDP (I don’t think this is very useful from a GNSO point of view, but maybe I am missing something)
Personally I would be content to focus on the first two, both broad as is.
Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting
· There are rumblings that there are some on the Board who think this meeting has outlived its usefulness; in light of that, it might be useful to discuss the value or lack of value from both the GNSO and Board/Staff perspective.
We'd be offering a dialogue with us about why they don't want a dialogue with us? Doesn't sound awkward at all...A priori I would think it better to clarify the concerns in advance of the meeting, e.g. via Adrian's survey, and to demonstrate the value of meetings by having a good discussion of key policy issues, perhaps in Bruce's mixed format. In any event, I am among those who've found these to be very useful.
ccNSO/GNSO meeting
· DNS-CERT
Sounds right. Bill
[Andrei Kolesnikov] Chuck, all - DNS-CERT will be a good neutral subject for this kind of meeting. But there are real things in common: non-IDN world around, synchronized IDN TLDs for example. ccNSO/GNSO meeting . DNS-CERT Please comment on the above and feel free to suggest new topics. I promised Janis and Chris I would get back to them. Thanks, Chuck
Thanks Andrei. I will add it. In preparation for this topic, would you be willing to prepare a 1 page paper briefly explaining the topic and listing the major issues? This will be a more complicated issue, especially for those who are not involved with IDNs, so I think it would especially facilitate discussion. Chuck From: Andrei Kolesnikov [mailto:andrei@cctld.ru] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 8:09 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'GNSO Council' Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels [Andrei Kolesnikov] Chuck, all - DNS-CERT will be a good neutral subject for this kind of meeting. But there are real things in common: non-IDN world around, synchronized IDN TLDs for example. ccNSO/GNSO meeting * DNS-CERT Please comment on the above and feel free to suggest new topics. I promised Janis and Chris I would get back to them. Thanks, Chuck
I will do. How much time do I have? Yours, --andrei From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 5:07 PM To: Andrei Kolesnikov; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels Thanks Andrei. I will add it. In preparation for this topic, would you be willing to prepare a 1 page paper briefly explaining the topic and listing the major issues? This will be a more complicated issue, especially for those who are not involved with IDNs, so I think it would especially facilitate discussion. Chuck From: Andrei Kolesnikov [mailto:andrei@cctld.ru] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 8:09 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'GNSO Council' Subject: RE: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels [Andrei Kolesnikov] Chuck, all - DNS-CERT will be a good neutral subject for this kind of meeting. But there are real things in common: non-IDN world around, synchronized IDN TLDs for example. ccNSO/GNSO meeting . DNS-CERT Please comment on the above and feel free to suggest new topics. I promised Janis and Chris I would get back to them. Thanks, Chuck
participants (6)
-
Adrian Kinderis -
Andrei Kolesnikov -
Bruce Tonkin -
Gomes, Chuck -
Stéphane Van Gelder -
William Drake