Re: [council] Meeting Protocol for Brussels and beyond...

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Last time around the bend, then back to work...

On Jun 2, 2010, at 11:39 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:

> I guess we just have different mental models of bottom up democratic 
> processes.  Yours is strictly representative, mine's participatory.  
>  
> AK>> How is asking a representative or the Chair to ask your question not 
> participatory? You are still in the room. You still have a voice…

As a matter of principle I think people should be able to speak in their own 
voices, elaborate, and follow up rather than settling for someone else reading 
a short statement or whatever that won't their nuances etc.  Pretty artificial, 
and would create quite the atmosphere in the room...
>  
> An inexact parallel but it speaks to worldviews—in related intergovernmental 
> organization processes, most governments have made clear they would like 
> global business, the Internet technical community, and civil society to sit 
> quietly or not even be in the room on the grounds that they sufficiently 
> represent all our viewpoints.  For those of us who have battled to open these 
> processes up to more diverse voices, it would be rather odd to then turn 
> around and impose limitations in the bodies we tout as superior precisely 
> because they allow open participation.
> 
> AK>> That paragraph has to be somewhat of an overreaction and emotional 
> hoo-haa!

Yup, dat's me

> Once again, how is my suggestion not open participation. I am not sure that 
> my suggestion hurts anyone’s civil liberties or restrict basic human rights 
> but I could be wrong… Why aren’t all these folks jumping up and down about 
> the Board having completely closed sessions with ICANN staff? How is it any 
> different?

I'd be happy to jump on that one.  In fact, I'd be happy if Council were to 
express such concerns with the RT, if they're shared.  FWIW NCSG and ALAC 
recently sent a letter to the board expressing concerns about the 
non-transparent and sometimes problematic briefing docs provided to board by 
staff. 
http://www.atlarge.icann.org/correspondence/correspondence-4-20may10-en.htm
>  
> In the same vain why aren’t our GNSO calls open for the public?
>  
> AK>> I note no response here...

In principle, it wouldn't bother me if "Councilors speak first and 
non-Councilors keep it brief and to the point" rules applied, a slot could be 
saved at the end of each topic or call for a quick question or intervention.  
In practice, since we struggle to get through the agendas in two hours anyway, 
one imagines the time available would get squeezed to zilch quite often, in 
which case comments we didn't get to could be sent by email.
>  
> I also think it is important to raise the profile of our Councilors (and the 
> prestige for that matter). Folks should be made to feel comfortable to use 
> them to convey a point of view. Also, Councilors work very hard, it could be 
> considered a position of value to have been elected to sit at the table and 
> to have the ability to converse directly with Staff and the Board. You never 
> know, it may entice more folks to want to put themselves forward as 
> Councilors if they can see an immediate benefit.
>  
> You really believe that the status (don't know about 'prestige') of 
> Councilors is reduced if someone sitting off the table is called on to offer 
> some thoughts after we've had our turns?  
>  
> AK>> Yup. That is why I wrote it.
> 
> 
>  
> I think talking to repeat offenders “offline” is a useless exercise and 
> potentially creates a difficult and embarrassing situation. Why should we 
> have to play police officer? I’d like to avoid that tension completely.
>  
> I agree it's awkward and hasn't worked sufficiently, but one could always 
> redouble the effort and up the ante a bit.
>  
> AK>> Please propose a method and an executioner. I have enough people that 
> think I’m a jerk and don’t need any help…

Well, I don't want to put anyone on the spot, but we do have people in 
leadership positions.  Or we could designate a diplomatically deft ambassador; 
would you like to volunteer? ;-)
> 
> 
>  
> With reference to my offer for drinks... we did it, but I had too many 
> members of the public claiming their right for a drink and ran out of money ;)
>  
> NC missed the memo :-(
> 
>  
> By the way, I am  against any invitation or information with the words “inter 
> alia” included. Makes me feel that only the smart people are invited...
>  
> Sorry, I do sometimes slip into UN-speak.  Chuck busted me the other day for 
> referring to the "ICANN Secretariat" in a draft doc, sigh...  But rest 
> assured, it's a free open air concert and Toots will serenade all comers 
> without regard to stakeholder group or other identities...
>  
> AK>> So I’ll be able to participate in the concert then with my rendition of 
> a few Led Zepplin songs played on my harmonica? I trust they don’t limit 
> participation on the stage ;)

As long as you can say I and I feel irie without laughing and have a better 
voice than Robert Plant, Toots might accommodate you...  Wouldn't be hard...

Cheers,

Bill


>  
> 
> 
>  
> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2010 4:20 PM
> To: Adrian Kinderis
> Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Council
> Subject: Re: [council] Meeting Protocol for Brussels and beyond...
>  
> Hi Adrian,
>  
> On Jun 2, 2010, at 2:24 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to suggest that there be no questions from the floor during 
> these sessions.
>  
> When we last had this conversation didn't we decide against draconian 
> measures that would preclude community participation (and were hence poorly 
> received by some) and for some intermediate steps like only Councilors at the 
> table, chair gives preference to Councilor comments and right sizes the time 
> for others, etc?  If people think this has not worked sufficiently, wouldn't 
> it be possible to simply have an offline conversation with the most relevant 
> parties saying please respect the following ground rules, and to reiterate 
> these at the outset of meetings?
>  
>  
> On Jun 2, 2010, at 2:51 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll shout an extra round at the bar on Saturday night to make up for it :)
>  
> Hmm...didn't I hear something like this a few meetings ago, didn't 
> materialize... :-)
>  
> BTW, on the matter of after hour amusement, perhaps I'll pass along something 
> I pointed out to NCSG, might be of interest to some here:
>  
> 
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 1:33 PM, William Drake
> <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi
>  
> Just an FYI for people who will be attending ICANN Brussels, as with Paris 
> two summers ago, this meeting overlaps with the annual Fete de la Musique 
> held across France, Belgium, Switzerland, etc.  Just had a look at the 
> program 
> http://2010.fetedelamusique.be/recherches?tid=&tid_1=All&city=Bruxelles and 
> inter alia Saturday night 19th Toots and the Maytals is playing in the park 
> near the conference site.
>  
> Bill
>  
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> ***********************************************************
> 
> 
>  

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
***********************************************************