RE: [council] FW: Doodle IDNG call

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

Thanks Stephane.  We could add a 5th principle:  "where some participants have 
to suffer unpleasant hours, we restrict meeting times to no more than one hour."

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 3:25 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [council] FW: Doodle IDNG call
> 
> I think all of us can understand where Adrian is coming from 
> here. Being in Australia, he suffers some insane meeting 
> times and this undoubtedly reduces his ability to participate 
> in the GNSO processes as much as he would like.
> Being based in Europe, I also have late evening (but 
> thankfully not early
> morning) meeting times.
> 
> So I agree with the initial suggestion that call times are 
> not solely arranged according to majority doodle votes, are 
> these are necessarily geographically weighed and if you have 
> 10 participants and 8 of them are from the US, the other 2 
> will not have much say.
> 
> I think Chuck makes some very good initial suggestions and I 
> agree that we need to consider this question of meeting 
> organisation at Council level as they impact all our working 
> groups and drafting teams.
> 
> I would like to suggest that, for those meetings where some 
> participants have to suffer unpleasant hours, we restrict 
> meeting times to no more than one hour. I know that it's 
> sometimes difficult to keep things concise, but when you're 
> on a call early in the morning or late at night, it seems 
> unreasonable to also require of you to sit through a couple 
> of hours of discussion and still provide valuable input.
> 
> I do feel that it's not just the times at which these 
> meetings are held which is a problem, but also the sheer 
> number of these calls that are required and their length.
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> 
> Le 03/05/09 16:40, « Gomes, Chuck » <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> 
> > 
> > Here are some suggestions regarding scheduling teleconference calls 
> > that I recently sent in response to a very valid concern 
> expressed by 
> > Adrian.  I suggest that we consider these or any 
> modifications to them 
> > in the GNSO as a whole.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx 
> > [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> > Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 10:21 AM
> > To: Adrian Kinderis; Glen de Saint Géry; ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: Doodle IDNG call
> > 
> > Adrian makes some good points that we need to take into 
> consideration.  
> > I would suggest that we do our best to follow all of following 
> > principles when we cannot find a time that everyone can make:
> > 
> > 1.  Select a time that maximizes participation.
> > 
> > 2.  Avoid any time that is ridiculous for any key participant
> > 
> > 3.  Make sure call leaders are able to participate
> > 
> > 4.  In cases where ridiculous times are unavoidable some, 
> attempt to 
> > rotate the use of such times so that certain participants are not 
> > always impacted (as suggested by Adrian).
> > 
> > 'Key participants' and 'Ridiculous' times may vary by 
> meeting but here 
> > are some possible general guidelines:
> > 
> > -  Key participants should include anyone whose live input 
> is needed; 
> > put another way, if the effectiveness of a meeting will be 
> reduced if 
> > someone has to participate after the meeting, then that 
> person should 
> > be considered a key participant.  A simple example of this 
> would be a 
> > case where a vote is planned and absentee voting is not 
> allowed; all 
> > eligible voters in this case would be key participants.  But the 
> > definition should not just include voting situations.
> > 
> > -  Any meeting time that requires even partial 
> participation for a key 
> > participant between midnight and 5 am should be excluded unless the 
> > impacted
> > participant(s) specifically agree(s) to the exception.  
> (For example, 
> > Edmon tends to prefer times that most of the rest of us consider 
> > ridiculous.)
> > 
> > I am sure improvements can be made to my ideas so I welcome them.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Adrian Kinderis
> >> Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 7:03 PM
> >> To: Glen de Saint Géry; ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: RE: Doodle IDNG call
> >> 
> >> These suggested call times are crazy!
> >> 
> >> Just once I'd like a call time about 4pm after I've had my 
> afternoon 
> >> coffee. I understand it is about balance but why can't we share it 
> >> around a little.
> >> 
> >> I won't be able to make these times (I'll take Bruce's advice and 
> >> just sit out these meetings when they are set for 
> inconvenient times).
> >> 
> >> Remind me to raise my concerns about Doodles too. Just 
> because a time 
> >> is most popular it is chosen. When you have such a participant 
> >> loading to North America nothing ever gets shared around and the 
> >> meeting times stay the same.
> >> 
> >> Glen - this rant is not aimed at you. I understand you 
> have a job to 
> >> do.
> >> 
> >> Thanks.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Adrian Kinderis
> >> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint 
> >> Géry
> >> Sent: Sunday, 3 May 2009 3:29 AM
> >> To: ntfy-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: Doodle IDNG call
> >> 
> >> Dear All,
> >> 
> >> Please indicate the day and time that would work for you 
> to discuss 
> >> the draft charter for an IDNG WG.
> >> 
> >> The time is originally noted in UTC but can be changed for 
> your time 
> >> zones.
> >> 
> >> http://www.doodle.com/47qaf4zk4387aptr
> >> 
> >> Thank you.
> >> Kind regards,
> >> 
> >> Glen
> >> 
> >> Glen de Saint Géry
> >> GNSO Secretariat
> >> gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> http://gnso.icann.org
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>