RE: [council] Meeting Protocol for Brussels and beyond...

[Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Interesting... thanks Bill.

I think you all (y'all) are missing the point about being elected 
representatives. The community input and participation is sufficiently covered 
- and if not, I have suggested mechanisms where their input is heard (via 
Councillors and or through the Chair). I do not consider this Draconian. 
Draconian would be to exclude them altogether or ask them for their input prior 
to the meeting. This is being organised and efficient. Don't forget, everyone 
gets a say.

In the same vain why aren't our GNSO calls open for the public?

I also think it is important to raise the profile of our Councilors (and the 
prestige for that matter). Folks should be made to feel comfortable to use them 
to convey a point of view. Also, Councilors work very hard, it could be 
considered a position of value to have been elected to sit at the table and to 
have the ability to converse directly with Staff and the Board. You never know, 
it may entice more folks to want to put themselves forward as Councilors if 
they can see an immediate benefit.

I think talking to repeat offenders "offline" is a useless exercise and 
potentially creates a difficult and embarrassing situation. Why should we have 
to play police officer? I'd like to avoid that tension completely.

With reference to my offer for drinks... we did it, but I had too many members 
of the public claiming their right for a drink and ran out of money ;)

By the way, I am  against any invitation or information with the words "inter 
alia" included. Makes me feel that only the smart people are invited...

Thanks.

Adrian Kinderis


From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2010 4:20 PM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Council
Subject: Re: [council] Meeting Protocol for Brussels and beyond...

Hi Adrian,

On Jun 2, 2010, at 2:24 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:


I would like to suggest that there be no questions from the floor during these 
sessions.

When we last had this conversation didn't we decide against draconian measures 
that would preclude community participation (and were hence poorly received by 
some) and for some intermediate steps like only Councilors at the table, chair 
gives preference to Councilor comments and right sizes the time for others, 
etc?  If people think this has not worked sufficiently, wouldn't it be possible 
to simply have an offline conversation with the most relevant parties saying 
please respect the following ground rules, and to reiterate these at the outset 
of meetings?


On Jun 2, 2010, at 2:51 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:


I'll shout an extra round at the bar on Saturday night to make up for it :)

Hmm...didn't I hear something like this a few meetings ago, didn't 
materialize... :-)

BTW, on the matter of after hour amusement, perhaps I'll pass along something I 
pointed out to NCSG, might be of interest to some here:


On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 1:33 PM, William Drake
<william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> 
wrote:

Hi

Just an FYI for people who will be attending ICANN Brussels, as with Paris two 
summers ago, this meeting overlaps with the annual Fete de la Musique held 
across France, Belgium, Switzerland, etc.  Just had a look at the program 
http://2010.fetedelamusique.be/recherches?tid=&tid_1=All&city=Bruxelles and 
inter alia Saturday night 19th Toots and the Maytals is playing in the park 
near the conference site.

Bill