Re: [council] GNSO reform - need to set up the schedule NOW !
- To: "avri@xxxxxxx" <avri@xxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] GNSO reform - need to set up the schedule NOW !
- From: Denise Michel <denise.michel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 02:53:08 -0700
- Accept-language: en-US
- Acceptlanguage: en-US
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcjYNWkFQDblOQjXRGOnOkfigpL42QABjEOj
- Thread-topic: [council] GNSO reform - need to set up the schedule NOW !
Arrangements have already been made to support this group. Rob Hoggarth is
staffing it and Glen is setting up an email list. All groups eligible to
participate (that we haven't heard from) are being contacted for designated
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri Jun 27 02:05:25 2008
Subject: Re: [council] GNSO reform - need to set up the schedule NOW !
Philip thanks for getting the ball rolling.
I agree we need to get to this right away.
I will be he Nomcom Appointee member of the group.
I understand that the staff has yet to pick the staff person who will
be assigned to work with this group.
Once we know who all of the members from constituencies and AC's in
liasion are, we can start to arrange a schedule. I agree that we
should have a first conversation next week and that a face to face
meeting would be useful if we can find a time/place that fits
It makes sense for Glen to set up a mailing list for this group as
soon as possible.
On 27 Jun 2008, at 10:04, Philip Sheppard wrote:
> Fellow Councillors,
> the Board has spoken and as any Board does when faced with
> intractable issues, it has sent
> then back to the intractable participants to sort out !
> I exaggerate, the Board has given us a 4 week window to seek a
> compromise ourselves and I
> find that positive.
> I especially welcomed those Board members who commented that working
> on principles and
> objectives first is more important than the tool to implement those
> principles such as
> parity or the number of votes.
> I believe we should start our WG discussions looking at options
> which meet the concerns of
> all parties, and then work out the best tools to meet them.
> Avri, Glen - we need to move rapidly on this group and have its
> first teleconference meeting
> next week w/c June 30 - perhaps July 2 at 1500 UTC with weekly
> calls or more thereafter.
> I suggest also a face to face of the small WG could be useful
> towards its completion stage -
> perhaps in ICANN Brussels (or an Amsterdam Airport hotel) weekend of
> 12-13 July ?
> Sorry to be presumptuous on dates but the timetable is very tight.
> I will be the BC representative.
> Who are the other members?