<div dir="auto"><div>Hi Farzi,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Tha ks for these initial thoughts.<br><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I totally agree with your point on the board refraining from re-opening issues. In fact, that is somewhat the Council’s position as well and the Council will be mentioning this as well to the board during their meeting. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">There is a significant difference between an internal council small team and a community-wide process that might be put together to contribute to policy development in an attempt to be "agile". Such a process risk circumventing the GNSO policy development procedures and eroding the role of the GNSO.</div><div dir="auto"><br>I also agree with Stephanie that we should mention the need for more transparency from the Council small team as well.</div><div dir="auto"><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">Warmly, <br>Tomslin</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 13 Mar 2023, 08:21 farzaneh badii, <<a href="mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com">farzaneh.badii@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">All,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">We have an NCSG board meeting today and the Board is asking a peculiar question:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">“The ICANN Board would like to explore how to</span><br style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">combine the efficiencies of an agile approach to problem solving, like</span><br style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">the Council’s small teams, with the need for accountability and</span><br style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">transparency, to make progress on policy conversations. When would such</span><br style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">an approach be most appropriate and how can we ensure that it does not</span><br style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">circumvent required steps in a policy development process? »</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">We discussed this during the NCSG meeting yesterday. In a nutshell we don't think an "agile approach" that is not predicted in the bylaws is appropriate at all. If the Board wants to make the processes more efficient and effective, they can refrain from re-opening the issues and rehashing the policy recommendations that we make in policy development processes. Also adding layers and layers of implementation and enforcement processes such as ODAs don't help with efficiency. Unfortunately the push for efficiency and the board desire to re-open issues or be creative in resolving unsolved matters has led to creating processes that are ad hoc and might not be in accordance with the bylaws. One such group that the board created and we objected to is the group on closed generics. (<b>we need to discuss this point)</b></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><b>this is my opinion which we can discuss:</b></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">The Council's small teams are not "agile processes". They are internal processes that don't violate the bylaws because the small teams don't make the decision, they just lay the groundwork for decision-making at the council level and they have to discuss all the issues with the council. </span><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">Please weigh in so that we can wrap it up by 3 PM. Also what's with the obsession with the word "agile". Somebody got an MBA recently and went to a WEF meeting?</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><div dir="ltr" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Farzaneh </font></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>