RV: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change
Dear all, Could you please let me know your position regarding Steve Crocker's proposal. I would favor option 1. Best regards, Osvaldo [cid:735235515@05052014-1AF4]Osvaldo Novoa Subgerente General Antel Guatemala 1075, Nivel 22 Montevideo, 11800 Uruguay Tel. +598 2928 6400 Fax. +598 2928 6401 ________________________________ De: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] En nombre de Jonathan Robinson Enviado el: Lunes, 05 de Mayo de 2014 07:55 Para: council@gnso.icann.org Asunto: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change All, See below and please provide any feedback you may have ASAP. I know some feel very strongly about the public forum but, given the High Level (Government) meeting taking place on Monday in London, a once-off schedule change may be a good idea? What is being asked for is guidance or feedback on 1 or 2 as a preferred option. Thanks, Jonathan From: soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org [mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Crocker Sent: 02 May 2014 20:02 To: soac-infoalert@icann.org Cc: Sally Costerton; Tanzanica S. King; Jim Trengrove; Icann-board ICANN; Nick Tomasso; Theresa Swinehart; Duncan Burns Subject: Re: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change Folks, Sally Costerton and I thank you all for your helpful responses to my earlier note on the idea of changing the Thursday agenda to accommodate more time for the public dialogue we need to deliver at our forthcoming London meeting. We are acutely conscious that the combination several major one-off events - the High Level Government Meeting (HLGM) and the two public consultations are putting significant pressure on the agenda for ICANN50. We are juggling trying to maximise flexibility for SOACs to do their work, access to the HLGM and the need to provide slots for Hot Topics for cross community dialogue with minimal agenda conflict. Having considered your feedback and consulted with staff, we suggest two options below. Please pick one and let us know over the next day or two. 1. We make the changes to Thursday as suggested and support this by running an additional IANA stewardship transition session on Monday after the opening session and provide support to the SOAC groups to find alternative slots on the agenda in addition to the early Thursday slot as needed. We pilot remote hubs using two-way video and hopefully a YouTube channel. The use of remote hubs actually doubled participation at NETmundial so could be a real opportunity to diversify input. 2. We keep Thursday as it usually runs with a four hour public forum and run two consultation sessions - one on the IANA stewardship transition and one on the ICANN accountability dialogue on a 'normal' schedule - this would be Monday or Wednesday to get time that is minimally conflicted. This would be much like Singapore. We would not set up the video remote hubs in this case or possibly the YouTube channel. This would maintain the full Public Forum but reduce the time and attention for the two consultation sessions. Also the Monday sessions will have to run parallel to the HLGM and we know that UKG have requested a session on IANA oversight transition led by Larry Strickling. Finally we are very aware that the community wants to improve the issue of agenda conflict at ICANN meetings. This topic was addressed in detail by the Meeting Strategy Working Group which recently had its report out for public comment. There was a previous opportunity to see this but in case you haven't, not here is a copy of the recommendations http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/recommendations-25fe... If you can let us know which option you prefer over the next 48 hours we would appreciate it. If we go for option 1 we need to let the community know early next week so that they can confirm travel and we can start the call to set up the hubs. Thanks, Steve Crocker and Sally Costerton ________________________________ El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.
I favor option 1 Wolf-Ulrich Sent from my personal phone
Am 05.05.2014 um 17:56 schrieb "Novoa, Osvaldo" <onovoa@antel.com.uy>:
Dear all, Could you please let me know your position regarding Steve Crocker's proposal. I would favor option 1. Best regards, Osvaldo
<LOGO A.bmp>Osvaldo Novoa Subgerente General Antel Guatemala 1075, Nivel 22 Montevideo, 11800 Uruguay
Tel. +598 2928 6400 Fax. +598 2928 6401
De: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] En nombre de Jonathan Robinson Enviado el: Lunes, 05 de Mayo de 2014 07:55 Para: council@gnso.icann.org Asunto: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change
All,
See below and please provide any feedback you may have ASAP.
I know some feel very strongly about the public forum but, given the High Level (Government) meeting taking place on Monday in London, a once-off schedule change may be a good idea?
What is being asked for is guidance or feedback on 1 or 2 as a preferred option.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org [mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Crocker Sent: 02 May 2014 20:02 To: soac-infoalert@icann.org Cc: Sally Costerton; Tanzanica S. King; Jim Trengrove; Icann-board ICANN; Nick Tomasso; Theresa Swinehart; Duncan Burns Subject: Re: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change
Folks,
Sally Costerton and I thank you all for your helpful responses to my earlier note on the idea of changing the Thursday agenda to accommodate more time for the public dialogue we need to deliver at our forthcoming London meeting. We are acutely conscious that the combination several major one-off events - the High Level Government Meeting (HLGM) and the two public consultations are putting significant pressure on the agenda for ICANN50.
We are juggling trying to maximise flexibility for SOACs to do their work, access to the HLGM and the need to provide slots for Hot Topics for cross community dialogue with minimal agenda conflict.
Having considered your feedback and consulted with staff, we suggest two options below. Please pick one and let us know over the next day or two.
We make the changes to Thursday as suggested and support this by running an additional IANA stewardship transition session on Monday after the opening session and provide support to the SOAC groups to find alternative slots on the agenda in addition to the early Thursday slot as needed. We pilot remote hubs using two-way video and hopefully a YouTube channel. The use of remote hubs actually doubled participation at NETmundial so could be a real opportunity to diversify input.
We keep Thursday as it usually runs with a four hour public forum and run two consultation sessions - one on the IANA stewardship transition and one on the ICANN accountability dialogue on a 'normal' schedule - this would be Monday or Wednesday to get time that is minimally conflicted. This would be much like Singapore. We would not set up the video remote hubs in this case or possibly the YouTube channel. This would maintain the full Public Forum but reduce the time and attention for the two consultation sessions. Also the Monday sessions will have to run parallel to the HLGM and we know that UKG have requested a session on IANA oversight transition led by Larry Strickling.
Finally we are very aware that the community wants to improve the issue of agenda conflict at ICANN meetings. This topic was addressed in detail by the Meeting Strategy Working Group which recently had its report out for public comment. There was a previous opportunity to see this but in case you haven’t, not here is a copy of the recommendations http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/recommendations-25fe...
If you can let us know which option you prefer over the next 48 hours we would appreciate it. If we go for option 1 we need to let the community know early next week so that they can confirm travel and we can start the call to set up the hubs.
Thanks,
Steve Crocker and Sally Costerton
El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información
This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy. <Untitled attachment 00487.txt>
I agree with Wolf-Ulrich. On May 5, 2014, at 12:35 PM, wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de wrote:
I favor option 1 Wolf-Ulrich
Sent from my personal phone
Am 05.05.2014 um 17:56 schrieb "Novoa, Osvaldo" <onovoa@antel.com.uy>:
Dear all, Could you please let me know your position regarding Steve Crocker's proposal. I would favor option 1. Best regards, Osvaldo
<LOGO A.bmp>Osvaldo Novoa Subgerente General Antel Guatemala 1075, Nivel 22 Montevideo, 11800 Uruguay
Tel. +598 2928 6400 Fax. +598 2928 6401
De: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] En nombre de Jonathan Robinson Enviado el: Lunes, 05 de Mayo de 2014 07:55 Para: council@gnso.icann.org Asunto: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change
All,
See below and please provide any feedback you may have ASAP.
I know some feel very strongly about the public forum but, given the High Level (Government) meeting taking place on Monday in London, a once-off schedule change may be a good idea?
What is being asked for is guidance or feedback on 1 or 2 as a preferred option.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org [mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf OfSteve Crocker Sent: 02 May 2014 20:02 To: soac-infoalert@icann.org Cc: Sally Costerton; Tanzanica S. King; Jim Trengrove; Icann-board ICANN; Nick Tomasso; Theresa Swinehart; Duncan Burns Subject: Re: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change
Folks,
Sally Costerton and I thank you all for your helpful responses to my earlier note on the idea of changing the Thursday agenda to accommodate more time for the public dialogue we need to deliver at our forthcoming London meeting. We are acutely conscious that the combination several major one-off events - the High Level Government Meeting (HLGM) and the two public consultations are putting significant pressure on the agenda for ICANN50.
We are juggling trying to maximise flexibility for SOACs to do their work, access to the HLGM and the need to provide slots for Hot Topics for cross community dialogue with minimal agenda conflict.
Having considered your feedback and consulted with staff, we suggest two options below. Please pick one and let us know over the next day or two.
We make the changes to Thursday as suggested and support this by running an additional IANA stewardship transition session on Monday after the opening session and provide support to the SOAC groups to find alternative slots on the agenda in addition to the early Thursday slot as needed. We pilot remote hubs using two-way video and hopefully a YouTube channel. The use of remote hubs actually doubled participation at NETmundial so could be a real opportunity to diversify input.
We keep Thursday as it usually runs with a four hour public forum and run two consultation sessions - one on the IANA stewardship transition and one on the ICANN accountability dialogue on a 'normal' schedule - this would be Monday or Wednesday to get time that is minimally conflicted. This would be much like Singapore. We would not set up the video remote hubs in this case or possibly the YouTube channel. This would maintain the full Public Forum but reduce the time and attention for the two consultation sessions. Also the Monday sessions will have to run parallel to the HLGM and we know that UKG have requested a session on IANA oversight transition led by Larry Strickling.
Finally we are very aware that the community wants to improve the issue of agenda conflict at ICANN meetings. This topic was addressed in detail by the Meeting Strategy Working Group which recently had its report out for public comment. There was a previous opportunity to see this but in case you haven’t, not here is a copy of the recommendationshttp://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/recommendations-25fe...
If you can let us know which option you prefer over the next 48 hours we would appreciate it. If we go for option 1 we need to let the community know early next week so that they can confirm travel and we can start the call to set up the hubs.
Thanks,
Steve Crocker and Sally Costerton
El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información
This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy. <Untitled attachment 00487.txt>
participants (3)
-
Christian Dawson -
Novoa, Osvaldo -
Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben＠t-online.de