Re: [council] TOPICS - Agenda Board meeting with GNSO Council - Sunday March 13, 4pm 5:30 pm
Jamil & Jamil
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
*** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink
From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 11:01:50
To: William Drake<william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: GNSO Council List<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [council] TOPICS - Agenda Board meeting with GNSO Council - Sunday
March 13, 4pm 5:30 pm
Had not seen Olga's recap email before I sent mine just now so apologies for
its redundant nature.
On the topics, I think having at least 2 topics is best. This is our only
session with the Board in SF following the recent reorg on Board interaction
with the community, so I think we should try and make the most of it.
As Bruce has offered to help with the Consumer Choice topic and as it has
consistently raised questions from us on what it is exactly that the Board
expected from us, how this resolution came into being without any priori
consultation with us or anything, I think we should also go with that.
So I would prefer Consumer choice and new TLDs as the 2 topics, if we only go
Le 4 mars 2011 à 08:43, William Drake a écrit :
> I think the experience over the past couple years with board, GAC et al
> meetings has been that multi-topic agendas don't work well, so I agree with
> Carlos that it'd be preferable to do one topic if possible.
> I agree with Jeff that Brussels raised questions about the handling of
> possible inconsistencies between GNSO positions (and community positions more
> generally) and any Board-GAC compromises. After the meeting I chatted with a
> couple boardies who were wondering aloud how should they loop back through
> the community to make sure everyone's still on board, do we do a public
> comment period, add time to the public forum, or what…Without wanting to add
> too much complexity to the process or too tightly tie the board's hands, one
> would think it'd be good to at least talk this through with them. To me this
> is pressing and hefty enough to fill a meeting.
> As to the others, while Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation merits
> focused attention, one would think more prior discussion of this in Council
> would be needed to make it a really productive discussion. It's sort of
> amorphous now and SGs may have rather different perspectives that need some
> initial converging. As to CWG, I've yet to hear a compelling argument that
> there's really a big problem regarding Board perceptions of their outputs,
> and in any event the Council's little group on this is just starting up, got
> a listserv a couple days ago. So that too one would think could bake a
> little more before we take it to them.
> On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:14 AM, Olga Cavalli wrote:
>> Dear Council Members,
>> This is the list of topics proposed for the Board/GNSO meeting:
>> - Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation: context of the Board
>> - CWGs and how the Board views them
>> - New TLDs. Role of the GNSO community in addressing items that come out of
>> the GAC/BD discussions on new gTLDs
>> Please let me know if I have forgotten something or if I have captured well
>> your ideas.
>> Best regards