Feedback on Timing of GNSO Review Working Group Calls
Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, It was noted during the meeting on 15 November that attendance has often been low at WG meetings and not all SGs and Cs have been represented. The WG noted that this could be a consequence of the timing of the meetings being inconvenient. Thus, per this action item from the meeting, “Send email to the WG list about the timing of the meeting and inviting feedback about changing the schedule” staff notes that due to the switch from daylight savings time to standard time, the call on 16 November stayed at 1200 UTC, but this caused the call to fall an hour earlier for some time zones, such as at 0700 EST. We have the option to keep the calls at 1200 UTC, move them to 1300 UTC, or to hold a Doodle poll to find a new day and time for a call. Please provide feedback on these options below at your earliest convenience, but no later than Monday, 27 November to confirm the timing of the call on Thursday, 30 November. You may indicate your preference by placing an “x” mark in front of the preferred option: _____ Option 1: 1200 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly _____ Option 2: 1300 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly _____ Option 3: Hold a Doodle Poll If we don’t receive enough responses to make a conclusive determination on the timing we’ll use the time of 1200 UTC for the call on 30 November but follow up with a Doodle poll for subsequent meetings. Thank you very much for your assistance. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
Thanks, Julie. As I mentioned during the call, because AZ doesn’t observe DST, the time didn’t change for me, but it’s an early call nonetheless, 5am. With the time change, the call is now at 4am for the Pacific coast folks. Not sure how many members are west coast, but I can see that being painful. That said, 1200 or 1300 UTC would work for me. I’m not going to complain if I get a sleep in a bit ;-) sara bockey sr. policy manager | GoDaddy™ sbockey@godaddy.com 480-366-3616 skype: sbockey This email message and any attachments hereto is intended for use only by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of this message and its attachments. From: Gnso-review-wg <gnso-review-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Thursday, November 16, 2017 at 1:38 PM To: "gnso-review-wg@icann.org" <gnso-review-wg@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] Feedback on Timing of GNSO Review Working Group Calls Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, It was noted during the meeting on 15 November that attendance has often been low at WG meetings and not all SGs and Cs have been represented. The WG noted that this could be a consequence of the timing of the meetings being inconvenient. Thus, per this action item from the meeting, “Send email to the WG list about the timing of the meeting and inviting feedback about changing the schedule” staff notes that due to the switch from daylight savings time to standard time, the call on 16 November stayed at 1200 UTC, but this caused the call to fall an hour earlier for some time zones, such as at 0700 EST. We have the option to keep the calls at 1200 UTC, move them to 1300 UTC, or to hold a Doodle poll to find a new day and time for a call. Please provide feedback on these options below at your earliest convenience, but no later than Monday, 27 November to confirm the timing of the call on Thursday, 30 November. You may indicate your preference by placing an “x” mark in front of the preferred option: __X___ Option 1: 1200 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly __X___ Option 2: 1300 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly _____ Option 3: Hold a Doodle Poll If we don’t receive enough responses to make a conclusive determination on the timing we’ll use the time of 1200 UTC for the call on 30 November but follow up with a Doodle poll for subsequent meetings. Thank you very much for your assistance. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
Hi Julie, I am fine with option 2.it is 22:00 JST but still bearable. Best, Rafik 2017-11-17 5:37 GMT+09:00 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>:
Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,
It was noted during the meeting on 15 November that attendance has often been low at WG meetings and not all SGs and Cs have been represented. The WG noted that this could be a consequence of the timing of the meetings being inconvenient.
Thus, per this action item from the meeting, “Send email to the WG list about the timing of the meeting and inviting feedback about changing the schedule” staff notes that due to the switch from daylight savings time to standard time, the call on 16 November stayed at 1200 UTC, but this caused the call to fall an hour earlier for some time zones, such as at 0700 EST. We have the option to keep the calls at 1200 UTC, move them to 1300 UTC, or to hold a Doodle poll to find a new day and time for a call. Please provide feedback on these options below at your earliest convenience, but no later than *Monday, 27 November* to confirm the timing of the call on Thursday, 30 November. You may indicate your preference by placing an “x” mark in front of the preferred option:
_____ Option 1: 1200 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 2: 1300 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 3: Hold a Doodle Poll
If we don’t receive enough responses to make a conclusive determination on the timing we’ll use the time of 1200 UTC for the call on 30 November but follow up with a Doodle poll for subsequent meetings.
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
_______________________________________________ Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg
The current time for the meeting seems not to be favourable for most of us and as highlighted may be one of the constraints on attendance. I support a doodle poll for a change in the day to monday or tuesday. Where this would not be convenient for most, option 2 would be a better time for me. lawrence. On Fri, November 17, 2017 12:27 am, Rafik Dammak wrote:
Hi Julie,
I am fine with option 2.it is 22:00 JST but still bearable.
Best,
Rafik
2017-11-17 5:37 GMT+09:00 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>:
Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,
It was noted during the meeting on 15 November that attendance has often been low at WG meetings and not all SGs and Cs have been represented. The WG noted that this could be a consequence of the timing of the meetings being inconvenient.
Thus, per this action item from the meeting, “Send email to the WG list about the timing of the meeting and inviting feedback about changing the schedule” staff notes that due to the switch from daylight savings time to standard time, the call on 16 November stayed at 1200 UTC, but this caused the call to fall an hour earlier for some time zones, such as at 0700 EST. We have the option to keep the calls at 1200 UTC, move them to 1300 UTC, or to hold a Doodle poll to find a new day and time for a call. Please provide feedback on these options below at your earliest convenience, but no later than *Monday, 27 November* to confirm the timing of the call on Thursday, 30 November. You may indicate your preference by placing an “x” mark in front of the preferred option:
_____ Option 1: 1200 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 2: 1300 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 3: Hold a Doodle Poll
If we don’t receive enough responses to make a conclusive determination on the timing we’ll use the time of 1200 UTC for the call on 30 November but follow up with a Doodle poll for subsequent meetings.
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
_______________________________________________ Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg
_______________________________________________ Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg
Julie, for me option 1 and 2 would either work, with a slight preference for option 2. The real challenge is bridging the time difference between US Pacific coast and Japan. To balance between bad and not so bad times we could alternate similar to the GNSO council: once at 1300 UTC and once at 2200 UTC. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Am 16.11.2017 um 21:37 schrieb Julie Hedlund:
Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,
It was noted during the meeting on 15 November that attendance has often been low at WG meetings and not all SGs and Cs have been represented. The WG noted that this could be a consequence of the timing of the meetings being inconvenient.
Thus, per this action item from the meeting, “Send email to the WG list about the timing of the meeting and inviting feedback about changing the schedule” staff notes that due to the switch from daylight savings time to standard time, the call on 16 November stayed at 1200 UTC, but this caused the call to fall an hour earlier for some time zones, such as at 0700 EST. We have the option to keep the calls at 1200 UTC, move them to 1300 UTC, or to hold a Doodle poll to find a new day and time for a call. Please provide feedback on these options below at your earliest convenience, but no later than _Monday, 27 November_ to confirm the timing of the call on Thursday, 30 November. You may indicate your preference by placing an “x” mark in front of the preferred option:
_____ Option 1: 1200 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 2: 1300 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 3: Hold a Doodle Poll
If we don’t receive enough responses to make a conclusive determination on the timing we’ll use the time of 1200 UTC for the call on 30 November but follow up with a Doodle poll for subsequent meetings.
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
_______________________________________________ Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg
Same preference for me kris
On Nov 17, 2017, at 15:25, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
Julie,
for me option 1 and 2 would either work, with a slight preference for option 2.
The real challenge is bridging the time difference between US Pacific coast and Japan. To balance between bad and not so bad times we could alternate similar to the GNSO council: once at 1300 UTC and once at 2200 UTC.
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
Am 16.11.2017 um 21:37 schrieb Julie Hedlund:
Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,
It was noted during the meeting on 15 November that attendance has often been low at WG meetings and not all SGs and Cs have been represented. The WG noted that this could be a consequence of the timing of the meetings being inconvenient.
Thus, per this action item from the meeting, “Send email to the WG list about the timing of the meeting and inviting feedback about changing the schedule” staff notes that due to the switch from daylight savings time to standard time, the call on 16 November stayed at 1200 UTC, but this caused the call to fall an hour earlier for some time zones, such as at 0700 EST. We have the option to keep the calls at 1200 UTC, move them to 1300 UTC, or to hold a Doodle poll to find a new day and time for a call. Please provide feedback on these options below at your earliest convenience, but no later than Monday, 27 November to confirm the timing of the call on Thursday, 30 November. You may indicate your preference by placing an “x” mark in front of the preferred option:
_____ Option 1: 1200 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 2: 1300 UTC on Thursdays bi-weekly
_____ Option 3: Hold a Doodle Poll
If we don’t receive enough responses to make a conclusive determination on the timing we’ll use the time of 1200 UTC for the call on 30 November but follow up with a Doodle poll for subsequent meetings.
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
_______________________________________________ Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-review-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg>
Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>
participants (6)
-
Julie Hedlund -
Kris Seeburn -
Lawrence OlaWale-Roberts -
Rafik Dammak -
Sara Bockey -
Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben