ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

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

As an individual matter, I support eliminating the theatrics of the
public meeting where all decisions were made in advance.  I think the
fuller, faster reports of Board decisions and rationales are a better
transparency move than the Friday performances were.


On 05/03/2012 09:16 AM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
> Thanks Wolf and Wolfgang for your comments.
> If there is more decision on this, could I urge others to chime in so that we 
> can ascertain whether a full agenda item is needed on this, or whether the 
> discussion can be had on the list.
> Thanks,
> Stéphane Van Gelder
> Directeur Général / General manager
> INDOM Group NBT France
> ----------------
> Head of Domain Operations
> Group NBT
> Le 3 mai 2012 à 11:38, <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx> <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>> 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"
>> or
>> - 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 
>> Wolf-Ulrich
>> 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.
>> Stéphane
>> 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,
>>> Margie
>>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
>>> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 2:08 PM
>>> To: 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?
>>> Stéphane
>>> Le 2 mai 2012 à 20:38, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :
>>> All,
>>> 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.
>>> Thanks.
>>> 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  / www.neustar.biz

Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx +1 617.863.0613
Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

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