Hi all and sorry for the silence in this discussion. I would agree with the majority of comments, that we should not require face-to-face meetings to ratify decisions made in calls or on the list. We are not planning that many f-2-f meetings and it would be impractical to defer final ratification for a month to ICANN if a decision could not be made in Istanbul for example. And (as someone who cannot be with you on Saturday and will only be able to join remotely for some of the discussions) I would consider any approach of deferring to f-2-f as very bad practice. At least we can all join in on any discussion on line. Otherwise I agree with Adiel and Joe's second paragraph here. Thanks Martin -----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alhadeff Sent: 03 September 2014 14:50 To: kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com; adiel@afrinic.net Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Version 1 of the agenda If it helps this discussion at all, and by way of clarification, the direction to hold and conclude the election on line occurred at a f2f meeting... in our london meeting there was a direction to hold the election of the officers intersessionally so that they could be in place to organize the next f2f meeting and to also allow for better consultation with communities. Perhaps one way to accommodate concerns while not creating another bureaucratic reporting requirement, is to ask the chair to highlight substantial outcomes that have occurred since our last meeting at the outset of the meeting... Joe Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) -----Original Message----- From: Adiel Akplogan [adiel@afrinic.net] Received: Wednesday, 03 Sep 2014, 2:01PM To: Kavouss Arasteh [kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] CC: Coordination Group [internal-cg@icann.org] Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Version 1 of the agenda Hello Kavouss, While in the context of a Board or any structural organisation body I understand your stand that decision taken online (the selection of the chairs happened on the mailing list) need to be **ratified** during formal meeting (which is normal governance practice), I would like to raise the fact the ICG is not managing a legal organisation but a coordination group put in place to do a specific job. We want to have simple and straight forward mechanisms to get the job done. We need to avoid over engineering this and adding too much bureaucracy to it. I will suggest as alternative to address your concern that we add a simple statement to the ICG page naming the Officers and the process by which they were selected. In fact do we have a defined quorum for our face to face meeting? If not, we may as well define and agree that all decisions of the ICG should be formally taken only our mailing list where we are sure we have everyone. That can be documented in our rule of proceedings. - a. On Sep 3, 2014, at 11:37 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Then we need to put reference to that minutes when published WE NEED TO DO THE WORK PRPOERLY If there is a minutes officially published and in that minutes reference made toi the election then reference to that minutes to be made, However, approving the minutes of a conference call is not legal as it reflects the views of those participated at the discussion. Alissia and others the issue was simple It is become more complex in referring to the minutes Once again simple affirmation of the election as an agenda item is the only possible way Pls reconder it again Regards Kavouss
2014-09-03 9:31 GMT+02:00 Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>: Just responding to note that Samantha was on both of our last calls, including the one where we discussed the approval of the chairs/vice-chairs, and I believe she will be sending minutes for our review and publication.
Alissa
On 9/2/14, 11:50 PM, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All I still believe that whether or nor ICG is political or non political environment we need to follow normal practices that every body else follows.. If in IETF or other ICANN constituencies that practice was not followed, it is not to me to intervene. However, as far as ICG which has been established pursuant to the announcement of NTIA( political or otherwise) we should formally approve or confirm the election or designation. I am n not convinced by the argument given below Quote " 1. I don’t see a real need to formally confirm/designate the chairs/vicechairs. This was already done with the election and the acceptance of the candidates and is hopefully reflected in the related minutes. I think we are here in a working and not in a political environment where such a formal step may be applicable." Unquote In the quoted paragraph it is mentioned that ' the acceptance of the candidates and is hopefully reflected in the related minutes" WHAT MINUTES. Dear Col;leagues There was some consultations ,there was poll. There was some outcome . Some voted .Some did not voted The results supported the Chair and two Vice chairs as contained in one of the last e-mail However, as ICG is a formal Group and its output and decisions are formal thus the designation /election of the Chair and two Vice chairs must be formally announced ,no doubt without any discussion ,what so ever , I hope that you have now been briefed as you should be and kindlky agree to that process Regards KAVOUSS I have not seen any minute( s0 as e-mail correspondence is e-mail correspondence and in no way is to be understood to construe as " Minutes" As for SUMMARY OF DECISION or WRAP UP I am happy that finally it is being accepted thus Patrik is kindly requested to include that in the agenda
It’s clear that in case of a public statement of the meeting this statement has to be discussed within the ICG. I suggest put the topic “public statement” under AOB – just as placeholder
2014-09-02 22:19 GMT+02:00 WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>: All,
1. I don’t see a real need to formally confirm/designate the chairs/vicechairs. This was already done with the election and the acceptance of the candidates and is hopefully reflected in the related minutes. I think we are here in a working and not in a political environment where such a formal step may be applicable. 2. I agree that a meeting wrap-up should be done. This may be done in a written form with bullet points. I would not ask for a document similar to the GAC communiquees which need prior formal coordination. It’s clear that in case of a public statement of the meeting this statement has to be discussed within the ICG. I suggest put the topic “public statement” under AOB – just as placeholder.
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Kavouss Arasteh Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 12:54 PM To: Patrik Fältström Cc: Coordination Group Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Version 1 of the agenda
Dear Patrik Dear All I humbly and once again suggest to add the two following items to the agenda 1. Confirmation/formal Designation of Chair and Vice Chairs, at the very beginning 2 Approval of Summary of conclusion reached/ decision made ( this summary should be prepared by chair and approved at the meeting) Kavouss
2014-09-02 12:06 GMT+02:00 Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>: All,
Can you who feel the most for the respective Agenda Items send me information you have, and I will try to add to the agenda so that it is more easy to understand. For example objectives.
Patrik
On 2 sep 2014, at 12:19, Lynn St.Amour <Lynn@LStAmour.org> wrote:
Thanks Patrik,
I think the main issues are captured.
Could I also suggest that for each item, the "agenda item leader" add a short statement of what we expect to accomplish (or a Purpose statement) as well as a link to the appropriate documents. This will help remote participants (and may even help the ICG focus).
For example:
- IANA Functions Transition Request for Proposals “RFP” Objective: Approve RFP Approve Timeline etc… Best, Lynn
On Sep 2, 2014, at 12:47 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
All,
Thanks for the comments. Version 1 of the agenda is just released where I have tried to move things around, re-allocated time slots etc according to the feedback.
I have still not validated time for lunch, coffee break and translators. Those outside events might impact time allocation.
Patrik <Agenda ICG meeting Istanbul-v1.doc> _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg