Public Comment proceeding now open for the How We Meet project

[Pedro de Perdigão Lana]

Hi everyone,

I would highlight the usefulness of checking the recording and material
provided in the ICANN82 How We Meet Community Feedback Session to learn
more about the issue:
https://icann82.sched.com/event/1dafe5fb6ad1d495ebe76635119a20ec.

Also, I would like to share our first answer that was provided when the
consultation was made before it was converted into a Public Comment, so we
can build up on it. This does not mean that we have to follow the same
responses, since more details were provided since this first analysis, and
this time we want to provide a deeper justification about our decisions
(I've seen the work that is already being done on the Google Doc, and it is
looking great!).

I have added the questions to the message that was previously sent, and the
answers are in bold:

Regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes:
> 1- Identify well in advance and prioritize meeting locations across the
> five (5) ICANN geographical regions with economical air travel, hotel
> accommodation and venue costs: *we are in favor *
> 2- Select repeat meeting locations (while respecting the need to rotate
> across regions) and enter into multi-year contracts for venues, hotels and
> other services. Where feasible and subject to the geographical rotation
> requirement, prioritize returning to locations where we have successfully
> held previous meetings: *we are not in favor *
> 3- Review and update the current meeting rotation for greater flexibility
> in selecting locations (currently, 3 visits per region over 5 years):*
> the proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented *
> 4- Review the requirement of having three different types of meetings in a
> calendar year (Community Forum, Policy Forum & AGM): *blank, need to
> consult with our community*
> 5- Reduce the duration of either the Community Forum or AGM (e.g. by one
> (1) day): *we are not in favor *
> 6- Reduce the number of standalone inter-sessional community meetings by
> moving them to be collocated with an ICANN Public Meeting as much as
> possible: *need to check impact such SPS GNSO council meeting or NCPH
> meeting*
> 7- Convert one (1) of the three (3) meetings each year to a virtual
> meeting: *conditional for having two F2F meetings  and virtual meeting is
> to review the approach for virtual meeting to take into account the
> challenges*
>
> Regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources
> 1- Reduce the number of meeting rooms required and/or amount of time/days
> for which meeting rooms are contracted, based on criteria such as average
> in-person session attendance at recent meetings (note: this may require a
> reduction in session numbers): *we are in favor*
>
2- Develop and impose agreed, community-wide criteria for how sessions are
> selected and placed on the ICANN Public Meetings schedule. In particular,
> review the need and agree on criteria for informational, training and
> similar sessions (e.g. “How It Works”) to take place at ICANN Public
> Meetings: *concern about the feasibility and how this will be implemented
> by the community*
> 3- Revisit audiovisual and related production and equipment needs for
> meeting rooms, especially the main room: *depends how much it impacts
> remote participation and the experience.*
> 4- Consider reducing the number of sessions for which live interpretation
> and/or live scribing is used (note: this may depend on the reliability of
> automated or remote services, such as Zoom capabilities, and will require
> coordination with ICANN’s Language Services function to ensure its
> feasibility: *concerns about local attendance experience.*
>
5- Revisit the block schedule to maximize room space, community time and
> overall cost effectiveness, including better use of the first weekend. This
> can also incorporate the suggestion to reduce the meeting duration of the
> six-day meetings by a day: *it is unclear how the block schedule can be
> revisited, requires more details*
> 6- Reduce the number of networking receptions unless a sponsor is
> available:* no position*
> 7- ICANN org to explore opportunities by pursuing a more comprehensive
> sponsorship strategy (e.g., increasing assistance, financially or in-kind,
> and including subventions): *we are in favor for looking for sponsorship
> and support *
> 8- Implement a conference registration fee for attendees other than
> appointed community leaders, session facilitators or speakers, and working
> group members (note: ICANN org is not currently set up to process payments
> of this type or to report them as may be legally required): *we are not
> in favor*
>
> Regarding Travel-Related Matters
> 1- Continue to reduce the number of staff traveling to ICANN Public
> Meetings (including through rotation or limiting travel to staff from that
> region wherever possible): *requires assessment of the impact in terms of
> support and meeting staff.*
> 2- At a later stage of this project, consider a discussion on updating and
> aligning Funded Travelers from the community to the purpose of each ICANN
> Public Meeting (note: data on the current and increased cost of Funded
> Travelers have been provided to the SOAC leaders): *we are not in favor*
>

Cordially,

*Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
Lawyer <https://www.nic.br/>, GEDAI/UFPR <https://www.gedai.com.br/>
Researcher
PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra)
Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC Brazil <https://www.isoc.org.br/>, NCUC
<https://www.ncuc.org/> & NCSG
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN) and CC
Brazil <https://br.creativecommons.net/>.
This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by
mistake, please reply informing it.


Em sáb., 12 de abr. de 2025 às 15:29, James Olorundare <
olorundarek at gmail.com> escreveu:

>  Hi Tomslin,
> This confirms my offer to volunteer regarding "How we meet". I have
> provided preliminary comments for consideration and remain available for
> further review.
>
> *Kunle Olorundare*
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 8:17 PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for sharing, Rafik.
>>
>> Hi all,
>> if you'd like to volunteer for the drafting of the comment, please let me
>> know.
>> I have created a Google doc
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BJqZx8AuwQNJONaBLiONDdyoJNC51GfInKjAMaZUDy0/edit?usp=sharing>
>> which is populated with the comment template to ease the drafting.
>>
>> Warmly,
>> Tomslin
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 at 12:13, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> A new public comment proceeding is open now , this time about the topic
>>> of How We Meet which was also covered in session in the last ICANN meeting
>>> in Seattle. We shared input previously regarding a draft proposal.
>>> @Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>  will follow-up with regard
>>> to volunteers for drafting NCSG comments.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>
>>> Dear community leaders,
>>>
>>> We are pleased to inform you that the Public Comment proceeding for the
>>> How We Meet project has opened, and will close on *Monday 19 May* after
>>> the requisite 40-day comment period:
>>> https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/how-we-meet-reviewing-the-implementation-of-the-icann-public-meetings-strategy-09-04-2025.
>>> We’d like to take this opportunity to thank you all for the collaborative
>>> and collegial discussions, including the initial conversations last year at
>>> ICANN80 that saw us hold an informal community consultation, paving the way
>>> for the more targeted project that is currently underway. We hope that you
>>> will also encourage your respective communities to submit input during this
>>> Public Comment proceeding, which in some cases can augment or confirm prior
>>> feedback they provided previously.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As you concurrently plan your groups’ sessions for ICANN83 and the rest
>>> of the year, we thought it might be useful to share the intended project
>>> timeline with you:
>>>
>>>    - Wednesday 9 April: Public Comment proceeding opens
>>>    - Monday 19 May: Public Comment proceeding closes (40 days)
>>>    - Wednesday 21 May: Staff to share initial analysis of Public
>>>    Comments with the How We Meet Community Discussion Group
>>>    - Thursday 22 May: Community Discussion Group meeting to review and
>>>    discuss the initial analysis
>>>    - ICANN83: Working Session for the Community Discussion Group to
>>>    continue discussions (open to the community to attend)
>>>    - End-June (planned): Report updated
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Mary (on behalf of the staff supporting the How We Meet project)
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Kunle Olorundare (MNSE, PRINCE2)
> +2348036551591
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250412/39fb01d5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group Report - 18 December 2024.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 289570 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250412/39fb01d5/attachment.pdf>