RE: [council] Draft minutes of GNSO Council teleconference 29 May 2008

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I also think it would be great to have more concise minutes.  As long as
we have the MP3 for full details, if the minutes contained a brief
summary for each agenda item along with any actions taken and any
actions assigned, that would be fine.  I don't think it is necessary to
repeat motions either; I think it would be fine to provide a link to the
original motion, briefly describe any amendment votes taken, show the
final motion with the vote.

Regarding transcription, my understanding is that it was not a very
accurate process and required lots of editing time.  But I will let Glen
talk about that.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:53 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Cc: Philip Sheppard
> Subject: RE: [council] Draft minutes of GNSO Council 
> teleconference 29 May 2008
> 
> 
> I agree that shorter is better.  I would prefer an executive summary
> format supplemented by audio and transcription.   
> 
> Why are our phone meetings not transcribed?  I've always 
> found that frustrating because it's then necessary to go 
> through the entire audio to find what is often a 3-minute 
> dialogue.  If we're heading in that direction anyway, why not 
> make it complete?  Transcription has the added benefit of 
> being easily searchable.
> 
> K
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:59 AM
> To: 'Council GNSO'
> Subject: RE: [council] Draft minutes of GNSO Council 
> teleconference 29 May 2008
> 
> 
> 
> I am increasingly concerned that the GNSO minutes are overly 
> long and detract from our work.
> The current set is 17 pages long. Finding the relevant 
> details - actions we agreed upon - is hard.
> 
> Is it really necessary to record every detail of "he said" "she said"
> and "he said again"? 
> If people want a minute by minute record we have the audio file.
> A set of minutes should reflect:
> 1. Who was there
> 2. What was discussed (including key questions but not every 
> question).
> 3. What was agreed.
> 
> This level of detail seems to have grown. Past DNSO and GNSO 
> minutes were not so lengthy.
> Has there been direction from the Chair to the GNSO secretary 
> to do them in this way?
> If so why?
> If not, lets ask for shorter minutes please.
> 
> Philip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>