Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Good to know that the majority of the Board remains in favour of the dinners.

Thanks Rita.

Stéphane

Le 21 mai 2010 à 16:34, Rodin Johnston, Rita a écrit :

> Stephane and all -
> 
> I very much agree with this sentiment and believe the majority of the board 
> does as well.  I'm not sure where this notion began, but bruce and I are in 
> dublin and can discuss with peter. I would not be in favor of discontinuing 
> dinner unless a better option for informal discussions was substituted. Thanks
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Fri May 21 10:09:27 2010
> Subject: Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels
> 
> 
> We are talking about the interaction between 2 of ICANN's major 
> decision-making bodies.
> 
> I think it's important to keep sight of the usefulness of getting the people 
> from each body talking to each other.
> 
> Even when there's no formal agenda, this type of interaction helps make 
> organisations work.
> 
> Yes we can keep it formal, but when it's a social event it's often easier for 
> people to meet and get to know each other. That then translates into real 
> benefits for the organisation when it comes to formal work sessions.
> 
> As a new councillor, I found the first Board dinner I attended helped take 
> away a lot of the awe and stress I felt at both learning the Council and 
> working with the Board. From informal conversations with Board members, I 
> found them to be much more approachable and in tune with the everyday 
> problems ICANN faces than I had thought. I would never have gotten that in a 
> more formal setting.
> 
> I think our joint dinner are an investment we all make to help oil the 
> internal workings of the organisation.
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 21 mai 2010 à 15:11, Bruce Tonkin a écrit :
> 
>> 
>> Hello All,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> I think the approach you suggest for the Board dinner is excellent.
>> To me, these dinners are crucial for us and the opportunity for
>> interaction with Board members they bring. I would hate to see them
>> disappear, but would like to understand why some on the Board feel they
>> should go.
>> 
>> 
>> Well here are some issues that get raised:
>> 
>> - the dinners are at the end of a long day of workshops/meetings - so
>> some members are too tired to give important matters appropriate
>> attention
>> 
>> - it is not always clear what the objective is - a general discussion
>> about topics, a social event, discussion about a specific issues that
>> the Board will be making a decision on that week?
>> 
>> - if the process is working properly - the Board will simply be
>> endorsing the recommendations from the Council that have consensus
>> support and should not be getting into the detail of particular policy
>> matters.  If there is disagreement amongst the parties in the GNSO - the
>> GNSO should work it out together - not try to get the Board to take
>> sides.
>> 
>> There are some that would prefer a more formal meeting - not
>> aligned with a breakfast/lunch or dinner - where there are materials
>> provided in advance and the Board members can ask questions about the
>> particular issue.
>> 
>> 
>> Personally I think a mixture of formal and informal can work.  e.g A
>> period of time for a structured discussion with documents provided in
>> advance, and the ability for the Board to ask questions on the
>> documents.   An informal eating occasion can then follow that is perhaps
>> optional for the participants to attend to get a better understanding of
>> the issues.    This structure used to work quite well when we were doing
>> the new gTLD policy development - the days were spent on policy
>> discussions, and the dinners were an opportunity to break down some
>> barriers in the discussions with no formal agenda, that often led to
>> better results the following day.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Bruce Tonkin
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****************************************************
> 
> To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we advise you 
> that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained 
> in this message was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, 
> for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal 
> Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) 
> promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters 
> addressed herein.
> ****************************************************
> ****************************************************
> 
> This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the 
> addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or 
> confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this 
> email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. 
> If you receive this email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 
> 735-3000 and permanently delete the original email (and any copy of any 
> email) and any printout thereof.
> 
> Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their 
> professional qualifications will be provided upon request.
> ****************************************************
> ==============================================================================