Re: [council] ICANN Academy message

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

Mary, Bill,

Because if we say it like that, to me it sounds implicitly like we have already 
signed off on the academy.

I did not get that as being a Council-wide position from our discussions on 
this yesterday.

What I heard was that some are strongly in favor, and some are strongly 
cautious (no-one seemed strongly against).

So my message was an attempt at balancing those two positions, without coming 
across as being negative.

Perhaps I should at this stage disclose that in my own personal opinion, the 
academy is a good idea. I realize that in my drive to earnestly represent the 
Council's view and bury my own, which is the approach I've always had to being 
Chair of this group, I did not even provide my own views. I am doing so now 
just for the sake of full disclosure but of course, I will not carry my own 
views into the WG discussions, only the Council's.

Thanks,

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
----------------
Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT

Le 11 mai 2012 à 08:18, William Drake a écrit :

> Hi Stephane,
> 
> I agree with Mary, particularly in light of prior disconnects on CWGs, the 
> tone is a bit negative as a first reaction. It almost sounds like we think 
> it's up to the GNSO Council to decide whether this goes forward so they must 
> satisfy us.  Of course there will have to be a discussion in the WG in which 
> the budgetary and other implications are addressed and those participants 
> that haven't had a chance yet to ponder the proposal can raise any questions 
> they have about the rationale.  And if ultimately some SGs decide they're 
> unpersuaded, that will have to be taken on board by the Board.  So why not 
> just say we look forward to participating and learning more about it? In the 
> event you think "establishment of" is too loaded in the other direction, 
> perhaps "The GNSO Council looks forward to participating in the community 
> discussion concerning the proposed ICANN Academy" would suffice?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Bill
> 
> On May 11, 2012, at 5:31 AM, <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Stephane, I think the first message could come across as arrogant to folks 
>> who did not follow today's discussion, particularly given recent 
>> sensitivities regarding CWGs. May I suggest something along the lines of the 
>> sub-message to proposed message 1 being the main message, and the main 
>> message becoming the sub, phrased as "The GNSO Council looks forward to 
>> participating in the community discussion concerning the establishment of 
>> the ICANN Academy"?
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Mary
>> 
>> 
>> Mary W S Wong 
>> Professor of Law 
>> Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP 
>> Chair, Graduate IP Programs 
>> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH 
>> 03301USAEmail: mary.wong@xxxxxxx.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage: 
>> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on the 
>> Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 
>> As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the 
>> University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of New 
>> Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have changed 
>> and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname@xxxxxxxxxxx. For more 
>> information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law, please visit 
>> law.unh.edu 
>> 
>> 
>> >>>
>> From:
>> Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>                  
>> To:
>> GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date:
>> 5/10/2012 3:59 PM
>> Subject:
>> [council] ICANN Academy message
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> As mentioned during our meeting today, I would like to write down a few 
>> baseline points to take to the Icann academy WG as being Council positions 
>> or items on which the Council is comfortable it wants answers for.
>> 
>> To get this started, here are my suggestion. Please comment, add or edit as 
>> required.
>> 
>> Message 1 to the WG: There should be no discussions on a possible curriculum 
>> until there has first been discussion (and consensus among the different 
>> community reps in the WG) on whether the academy itself should be created.
>> GNSO sub-message to message 1:  The GNSO Council agrees the concept of an 
>> academy to help newcomers get to grips with the ICANN world is a good idea. 
>> But there needs to be clear guidelines on finance, budget and implementation.
>> 
>> Message 2 to the WG: Once it has been determined that the concept of an 
>> academy is one that should be pushed forward, is willing to provide 
>> background material and support in helping academy attendees understand the 
>> intricacies of the GNSO and welcomes any suggestions from the WG on what 
>> type of material is needed.
>> 
>> Please let me have other suggestions. Thanks.
>> 
>> Stéphane Van Gelder
>> Directeur Général / General manager
>> INDOM Group NBT France
>> ----------------
>> Head of Domain Operations
>> Group NBT
>> 
>> 
>