RE: [council] Draft minutes of GNSO Council teleconference 29 May 2008
- To: "'Council GNSO'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Draft minutes of GNSO Council teleconference 29 May 2008
- From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:59:18 +0200
- In-reply-to: <484F90B3.email@example.com>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <484F90B3.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcjLm5uK4pvJ0NPcRqmDUCUQ6eSetwABKQcw
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 it really necessary to record every detail of "he said" "she said" and "he
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
Has there been direction from the Chair to the GNSO secretary to do them in
If so why?
If not, lets ask for shorter minutes please.