Re: [council] Fwd: GNSO meeting with GAC in Singapore

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>]

Hi Stéphane

Two small friendly quibbles.

On Jun 13, 2011, at 6:07 PM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:

> I would argue that the GAC only appear more important than everyone else if 
> everyone else lets them.

And I would argue that irrespective of how the GAC's influence to date appears 
from the perspective of our sandbox, a) the governments they represent have a 
lot of cards to play if they think push has come to shove, and b) there's one 
government that's already proven not to be shy about getting into the game.
> 
> And to be honest, in my conversations with GAC members, I have never gotten 
> the feeling from them that they are setting themselves up to be more 
> important than the rest of us. They just feel that they have a responsibility 
> that we don't: the public interest.

We don't?  Under the AoC "ICANN" has that responsibility, not the GAC alone.  
Are we not ICANN?

Cheers,

Bill

> 
> 
> 
> Le 13 juin 2011 à 02:40, <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> 
>> On paper, I think Adrian has it right when he says, of the GAC, "They are no 
>> more important than any other" stake holder group, but the practice as 
>> revealed in the new gTLD negotiations seem to suggest otherwise. 
>> 
>> Is the GAC's inability to find a friendly time to meet with the Council 
>> (more) evidence of ICANN developing a decision-making process alternative to 
>> the official one?
>> 
>> Or it could be that governments, on their own, are taking on a "first among 
>> equals" point-of-view.
>> 
>> All this makes a joint session desirable, but not worth meeting at midnight 
>> at a local McDonalds.
>> 
>> Berard  
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: RE: [council] Fwd: GNSO meeting with GAC in Singapore
>> From: Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Sun, June 12, 2011 5:00 pm
>> To: Stéphane_Van_Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>;, William
>> Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>
>> Cc: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> I find it ironic that the GAC have complained about not having their voice 
>> heard and now, when everyone is bending over backwards to accommodate them 
>> they choose not to see the GNSO Council – perhaps we are not important 
>> enough.
>>  
>> I say let them be and let them know that we hope to be able to accommodate 
>> them in Senegal but we will have to confirm our schedule.
>>  
>> Let’s remember they are but one body that feeds into this multi-stakeholder 
>> community. They are no more important than any other...
>>  
>> Adrian Kinderis
>> 
>>  
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
>> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
>> Sent: Sunday, 12 June 2011 10:06 PM
>> To: William Drake
>> Cc: GNSO Council
>> Subject: Re: [council] Fwd: GNSO meeting with GAC in Singapore
>>  
>> Yup, that's the general gist of what I said to Heather as well, including 
>> the fact that Thursday sounded so difficult to me for the Council to 
>> accommodate that I didn't think it would work.
>>  
>> Happy to insist on some face time with the GAC if the Council feels it wants 
>> to push the issue. But in the end, if they feel overstreched and would like 
>> to give the GNSO a miss this time around, it may be difficult to force them 
>> to see us.
>>  
>> Stéphane
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Le 12 juin 2011 à 12:47, William Drake a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>> Hi from Singapore
>>  
>> Hot and humid here, you've been warned…
>>  
>> I have to admit I'm puzzled that GAC has time to meet with the Board, ALAC, 
>> ccNSO, registrars, SSAC, & review teams but none to meet with the Council.  
>> Meanwhile dangling in the wind are some of the ideas floated in SF (sorry, 
>> SV) such as having a joint team to explore options for including them 
>> earlier/better in GNSO work, establishing liaisons with SGs, etc.  I'd have 
>> thought these and other ideas merited follow up.  So if the most we can get 
>> is an informal discussion, I'd be in favor of it.  But Thursday looks lousy, 
>> with public participation,  IGF & JAS (at the same time, a huge pity for 
>> some of us), Council round up and the forum; the only open slots I see would 
>> be breakfast meeting (horrid) or the lunch break (for those who can skip 
>> Getting Ready).
>>  
>> Thoughts?
>>  
>> BIll
>>  
>> On Jun 11, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Councillors,
>>  
>> As I mentioned before, the GAC has requested that we not hold our usual 
>> meeting with them in Singapore. I have continued to discuss this with 
>> Heather, and she has sent me the following suggestion:
>>  
>> Hi Stéphane,
>> 
>> I do understand.  The GAC is also reluctant but we have been very stretched 
>> for some time and haven't been able to meet with other communities.  There 
>> also now 2 Review Teams in addition to dealing with the previous RT 
>> recommendations.  It goes on and on.
>> 
>> Let 's try to arrange an informal discussion - perhaps on the Thursday?  I'm 
>> not sure what all is scheduled for Thur. though I know  a few of us have a 
>> lunch meeting and there is also the session on developing countries.
>> 
>> Heather  
>>  
>> I don't think an informal meeting is really what we want. Plus, I think at 
>> this late stage it would be hard to organise. What does the Council think?
>>  
>> Thanks,
>>  
>> Stéphane
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Début du message réexpédié :
>> 
>> 
>> De : <Heather.Dryden@xxxxxxxx>
>> Date : 10 juin 2011 23:24:20 HAEC
>> À : <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Objet : RE: GNSO meeting with GAC in Singapore
>>  
>> Hi Stéphane,
>> 
>> I do understand.  The GAC is also reluctant but we have been very stretched 
>> for some time and haven't been able to meet with other communities.  There 
>> also now 2 Review Teams in addition to dealing with the previous RT 
>> recommendations.  It goes on and on.
>> 
>> Let 's try to arrange an informal discussion - perhaps on the Thursday?  I'm 
>> not sure what all is scheduled for Thur. though I know  a few of us have a 
>> lunch meeting and there is also the session on developing countries.
>> 
>> Heather   
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2011 12:03 PM
>> To: Dryden, Heather: SPS
>> Subject: Re: GNSO meeting with GAC in Singapore
>> 
>> Hi Heather,
>> 
>> Thanks for your email.
>> 
>> I would rather not postpone our Singapore meeting with the GAC obviously, 
>> because I know the GNSO considers those meetings as very valuable.
>> 
>> However I also understand that the GAC's Singapore schedule is probably so 
>> hectic you need to find time somewhere.
>> 
>> Would it be helpful to have an informal discussion between the GAC and GNSO 
>> Chairs and VCs in Singapore?
>> 
>> Stéphane
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Le 6 juin 2011 à 23:25, <Heather.Dryden@xxxxxxxx> <Heather.Dryden@xxxxxxxx> 
>> a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>> Dear Stéphane,
>>  
>> I believe that we currently have 11 - 12.30 on the Wednesday scheduled for a 
>> GNSO/GAC meeting in Singapore.  I would like to propose that we postpone the 
>> meeting until Senegal and perhaps schedule a longer meeting of 2 or 3 hours 
>> to permit a more in-depth discussion of how the GAC and the GNSO 
>> respectively conduct their work.  This would allow the GAC to better prepare 
>> for a discussion of working methods (for example, how the GAC arrives at 
>> consensus views, what we consider to be consensus etc.).  This would also 
>> provide the GNSO with the opportunity to describe/explain how you do what 
>> you do, the implications of the new structure and  how the GNSO approaches 
>> policy development.
>>  
>> In Singapore, the GAC will be looking at ways to organize its work, 
>> including how it works with other parts of the community and prepares for 
>> meetings.  I will seek GAC representatives to come forward and lead on the 
>> GNSO for the GAC.  Either way, I would be happy to meet with you in 
>> Singapore (and hopefully the GAC vice-chairs could join if GAC volunteers 
>> have not yet been identified) to share some thoughts.  
>>  
>> I would like to move to greater preparation for all the GAC face-to-face 
>> meetings (including times when the GAC is meeting by itself), with the 
>> support of the new GAC secretariat, so that discussions can be more focused 
>> when we do meet in person.          
>>  
>> Do let me know what your thoughts are...
>>  
>> Many thanks and see you soon,
>> Heather
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>