ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

AW: [council] Proposed Agenda Item - Elimination of Friday Public Board Meetings

My personal view on this is mixed.

Saving of time and money is always preferable - but not at the expense of 
transparency when the board is taking decisions at public meetings. SO/AC/BC 
reporting could be removed by providing them in written form only.
But it makes a difference
- to hold "a one-hour session following the Public Forum on Thursday 
afternoon..... and outline what they have heard during the week from their 
meetings with AC/SOs and their constituent parts and identify those matters 
they expect to be dealing with...", to decide upon during non-public board 
sessions and at the following ICANN Public Meeting to "report to the community 
on what they have dealt with since Prague"
- to discuss and take decisions publicly

I'm curious to know whether this board decision was based on the survey 
("Improving Global Engagement") ICANN started in March where they solicited 
community input on improving e.g. effectiveness. For me the Public Meetings - 
with all their facets - are per se the highlights of global engagement.

Best regards

Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im 
Auftrag von Stéphane Van Gelder
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. Mai 2012 22:52
An: Margie Milam
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Council
Betreff: Re: [council] Proposed Agenda Item - Elimination of Friday Public 
Board Meetings

Thanks Margie, much appreciated.

In the meantime, let me add some more context for the benefit of the Council.

In CR, Steve asked me what I would think of the idea of shortening the ICANN 
meeting week by doing away with the Friday. This was floated to me as just an 
idea. I was given no indication that it would be implemented one day, let alone 
in Prague. And I was given no details on its possible implementation.

When Steve discussed this with me, I did not get the sense that he meant to do 
a public consultation on this decision. This was a private conversation and not 
one where it was at any time made clear to me that I should break Steve's 
confidence and discuss this publicly. That is why I did not discuss this here.

This week's announcement has, as Jeff says, generated some negative comments. 
Those that I have seen are that this decision was taken without any 
consultation and that doing away with the Friday Board meeting is detrimental 
to transparency.

My own personal view is otherwise. I believe that cutting the Friday out of the 
ICANN week is a step in the right direction towards reducing costs and time 
challenges for meeting participants, including the Board. Over the past year, I 
have seen the Board work hard to improve its transparency. We now have detailed 
rationale on votes at every meeting and explanations of the issues being 
considered. So I am comfortable with giving the Board a little of the benefit 
of the doubt in trying out new ideas such as this one.


Le 2 mai 2012 à 22:10, Margie Milam a écrit :

Hi Stéphane,
I'll follow up internally to provide the requested information.
Best regards,
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 2:08 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Council
Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Agenda Item - Elimination of Friday Public 
Board Meetings
Is someone from Staff able to provide the requested information, whether it be 
on the list or during the next Council meeting?
Le 2 mai 2012 à 20:38, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :

Given the announcement yesterday of the elimination of the public Board 
meetings at ICANN, I would like to put this on the Council agenda as a 
discussion item.  I would like it if someone from ICANN that is familiar with 
the rationale behind this decision could give us an explanation of how and why 
that decision was made.
Also, if the ICANN Board can unilaterally declare that all of its meetings will 
be private, does this set a precedent for its Supporting Organizations to do 
the same thing?  I have not reviewed the bylaws with respect to the Council in 
a little bit, but does the Council have the discretion to declare that it will 
no longer hold a public GNSO Council meeting at ICANN?

I think there has been enough disapproval expressed within the community in the 
last day or so that at least merits a discussion of this decision at the 
Council level.

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
21575 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, VA 20166
Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx>  / 

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>