RE: [council] Feedback on Open Joint Sessions in Cairo

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

Thanks Avri.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:58 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: Re: [council] Feedback on Open Joint Sessions in Cairo
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The Thursday GNSO meeting came up with some concrete 
> proposals that I passed on to the other chairs.
> 
> In essence the GNSO suggestions have been accepted:
> 
> Format for first meeting
> 
> - a round table format with constituency and region 
> representatives (each of the ACSOs figures out its own mix).  
> How this is done remains to be discussed.
> - 3 important bullets on the topic(s) from each of the ACSOs 
> published before the meeting
> - Ranking of the priority of the topic(s) within the ACSO is 
> also published
> 
> Same sort of schedule
> 
> - first meeting at the beginning of the week to share opinions
> - second meeting at the end to share feedback (this one might 
> still invovle chairs) we did nt discuss it.
> 
> Topic has not been set yet.  Various sub-themes from 'fees' 
> was used as an example during the meeting.
> 
> So we essentially did as you recommended already, although if 
> there is  
> more to say, or if I missed the point, we can certainly go further.   
> In that case I wold recommend a drafting team approach, with 
> those who want to flesh the idea out further producing a 
> proposal for the Council to consider.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> 
> On 11 Nov 2008, at 18:10, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
> > I wonder if we should take the initiate to develop a 
> proposal for an 
> > improved format for Mexico City?
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > ] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
> > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 10:32 AM
> > To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [council] Feedback on Open Joint Sessions in Cairo
> >
> > I wanted to provide some feedback on the open joint sessions.
> >
> > Positive points
> > - it happened
> > - it addressed genuine cross SO/AC issues
> >
> > Negative points
> > - many issues were ill suited to a single SO/AC view and so 
> the chair 
> > was unable to provide input
> > - the event was a bit lack lustre because of this overly 
> strong focus 
> > on the chairs
> > - I did not agree with the populist proposal to have every SO under 
> > the sun here just because they exist. The event was 
> intended to foster 
> > understanding on joint issues not be a platform for every SO/ AC.
> >
> > Proposal
> > Imagine a large empty room with one large round table with the full 
> > leadership of each organisation sitting ie the GNSO Council, CC 
> > council, the ALAC, the GAC leadership etc. It would be a 
> big table - 
> > maybe three tiered in the style of UN security council with 
> one lead. 
> > But it would be exciting if THIS group had answered the questions.  
> > Observers would sit around the group in outer circles, 
> interacting as 
> > usual.
> >
> >
> > Philip
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > PS Glen would you be so kind as to forward this to Patrick 
> Sharry also 
> > ?
> 
>