[council] Re: [ccsg-chairs] Suspending list

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

Rosemary,

I agree with all the points you've made.

To your more general point on the dangers of seeing the GNSO isolate itself 
from the rest of the community. That is something that I think we should always 
watch out for, on everything we do. I actually think it is a crucial point for 
us at the moment, because the need for cross-community interaction is, as you 
say, underscored in the AoC. However, as recent CWGs have shown, I also think 
this needs to be done in a careful and structured way. That is why I think 
Wolf's approach to the proposed SO and AC Chairs meeting with Rod before SF is 
probably the one that makes most sense to the GNSO at this time (please see 
separate email for that contact).

To the mailing list, and also taking on board Bill and Wolf's comments, I felt 
comfortable suspending the list because it can be recreated at any time. I 
don't think it matters if the list is started now or in a couple of days' time. 
So as it was obvious that some on the Council were against it, I felt it best 
to suspend for now and let the discussion develop. We now have as many for as 
we have against. So let's give others time to chime in and then see where we 
want to go.

Thanks,

Stéphane

Le 20 janv. 2011 à 04:28, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit :

> Hi Stephane
> 
> I'm not sure we've allowed enough time for people to properly consider this 
> idea and reflect on other views
> 
> I got the first email on 19th Jan at 4.31am my time (Sydney) and then the 
> suspend list email a little over 24 hours later
> 
> With a quite a lot going on with work and otherwise I was not able to express 
> a view within the 24 hours - my apologies for that.
> 
> NCSG I think is a good example where (at the moment) our SG Chair SG Policy 
> Chair are not on Council and we have practical difficulty keeping up with the 
> task of ensuring full communication of Council matters so that our SG as a 
> whole can make an informed and constructive contribution to GNSO 
> deliberations.
> 
> So I support the suggested list. 
> 
> Individuals can make their own decision about how closely they need to follow 
> the list..and perhaps not at all.
> 
> In a very general sense, it seems to me there is a danger that the increasing 
> specificity of GNSO focus and narrowing of scope will come at the cost of 
> strategic effectiveness for GNSO in ICANN as a whole. 
> 
> The overarching context provided by the Affirmation of Commitments and the 
> agreed Strategy Plan suggest a preference for open, transparent and engaged 
> communication between GNSO stakeholders and across the ICANN community.
> 
> I thought your suggestion was a practical and positive contribution to open 
> dialogue and I am truly sorry I was not able to express this view within the 
> limited (as it turned out) timeframe available.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Rosemary 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosemary Sinclair
> Managing Director, ATUG
> Chairman, INTUG
> T: +61 2 94958901  F: +61 2 94193889
> M: +61 413734490 
> Email: rosemary.sinclair@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Skype: rasinclair
> 
> Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information www.atug.com.au 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccsg-chairs@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ccsg-chairs@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
> Sent: Thursday, 20 January 2011 12:01 PM
> To: Metalitz, Steven
> Cc: ccsg-chairs@xxxxxxxxx; Rosette, Kristina; Taylor, David
> Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [ccsg-chairs] Suspending list
> 
> 
> Steve,
> 
> That is correct. Kristina also said she was never for nor against. There has 
> been no other reactions so far.
> 
> I am disappointed by the reactions that we have had, but there's really very 
> little I can do if those reactions are the only ones that we get.
> 
> So if the people on this group have a different opinion, then once again I 
> suggest discussing that with your respective Council reps to get that 
> position across.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 19 janv. 2011 à 19:40, Metalitz, Steven a écrit :
> 
>> 
>> Stephane, 
>> 
>> I don't follow that list, but from what I see from looking at the archive 
>> just now, the negative reactions are solely from your fellow Registrar SG 
>> representatives.  Is that correct or did I miss something?  
>> 
>> Steve 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-ccsg-chairs@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ccsg-chairs@xxxxxxxxx] On 
>> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 1:10 PM
>> To: ccsg-chairs@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [ccsg-chairs] Suspending list
>> 
>> 
>> Dear C and SG Chairs,
>> 
>> I'm sure you all follow the Council list and are therefore aware of the 
>> discussion about this list on there.
>> 
>> The reactions so far from the Council are against this list.
>> 
>> To my great regret, I am therefore asking Glen to suspend it.
>> 
>> If you do not agree with this decision, please work through your Council 
>> reps to make that position known.
>> 
>> Thanks for your understanding.
>> 
>> Stéphane
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
>