[PC-NCSG] Do we need to have a call?

Tue Nov 25 05:34:46 EET 2014

Hi Marilia,

> - Could we agree on a date for our members who are part of WGs to report
> back with key issues about the work of the WG that NCSG PC should take
> position in the next mtg? This is based on WG agenda, not GNSO, so maybe we
> would have more time to be informed about substantive things. Sharing
> concrete and concise issues/questions about course of action would be
> helpful. And setting a date would help us keep track of incoming info, I
> think.
>

public comments initiated by WG or request of input  can happen anytime,
not necessarily aligned with GNSO council calls schedule and having their
own timeline (good way to see that is to checking the project list). it
happened before that some members asked for input and shared info in NCSG
mailing list and so the PC.

However, GNSO council agenda give a lot of guidance with the updates and
motions there. Moreover councillors get heads-up about things coming since
a lot things should or are already happening in the gnso council mailing
list.
I want to reiterate again that when we discuss about public comments and WG
updates during NCSG calls is giving opportunity for WG members to give
updates or raising attention about something we need to care. it is more
easier and straightforward. to be honest I don't know if we can really get
such written briefings or updates days before and avoiding any burden on
volunteers.

> - I am missing a way to have a quick and clear view about what is going on
> in the WGs, the stage of dicussions, the deadlines for action... all in one
> focal point. Some time ago I made a spreadsheet that could be uploaded in
> drive and shared among our members. I enclose the spreadsheet attached.
> Although some ppl had the feeling that this spreadsheet would not be very
> useful and would duplicate the space that we have here:
> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40928134 I would
> like to make the suggestion again, because I feel the online space is: a)
> incomplete; b) harder to keep updated than a drive file; c) Not enough
> collaborative; d) completely public, so not good to share internal info
> there.
>

to clarify some misunderstanding, anybody joining a WG should have a wiki
account , same for councillors so everybody can update it. furthermore,
wiki space is collaborative *online* space (we have history track, comments
space, everyone can populate anytime). it is also possible to restrict the
access of wiki space if needed.

 having a shared spreadsheet doesn't fix the root cause: who will keep the
document updated e.g is it the role of to be elected PC chair?councillors?
only WG members?everybody?
to be blunt here, it is the pattern of someone asking someone else to do
something and usually it is not working well in our context.

my concern is how to keep things manageable and done, we get many ideas and
suggestions. that is good but at the end someone needs to take the lead and
commit to do it. but that is another story....

Rafik

>
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> I assumed you weren't either since once you ceased being a council member
>> your seat on the PC was taken by another council member and you became an
>> observer in the group.
>>
>> I don't think our charter allows observers to be chair.
>>
>> We had an alternate chair for a bit, but then he left.
>>
>> For the CCWG-Account I presumed to play chair, since i had been an alt-
>> chair last year and gap filling is a natural inclination of mine.
>>
>> And while the charter prohibits Rafik from being PC Chair, I am hoping he
>> will act as chair pro tem until we get an election done.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 24-Nov-14 11:26, Maria Farrell wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Sorry! Been in the midst of an intensive teaching and prep period, not that it's an excuse given what others manage to get done...
>>
>> Just for clarification, am I still chair? I had foolishly assumed I wasn't.
>>
>> My apologies, m
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>>  On 23 Nov 2014, at 17:20, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>
>> I totally agree, it just seems not much is happening.  Those of us on working groups (pol/impl, ppsai being mine) could use some input from others as we are influencing outcomes.
>> cheers Steph
>>
>>  On 14-11-23 3:49 AM, William Drake wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>>
>>  On Nov 22, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>
>> Folks, there was some discussion a couple of weeks ago about the need to have a regular call.  I think it is a good idea, others thought the list worked.  We have a number of things that need to be worked on, and some that need a decision.  Can someone please remind me of what they are?
>> And if we are not going to have a meeting then perhaps a more vigorous discussion of things that need a decision would be a good idea.
>> cheers Stephanie
>>
>>  On the Nov. 11 NCSG PC call I raised the chair topic and suggested that Amr would be great at this, since he?s both a process and a substance maven.  Avri suggested that given the workload and past experience with inconsistent chairing it?d be desirable to have a non-Councilor in the role (although then we have a chair elected by a constituency rather than the whole SG).  I?m not aware that the conversation has proceeded beyond this, has it?  It would seem pressing to resolve.
>>
>> Re: establishing a second monthly NCSG PC call, I?m wondering if maybe we couldn?t first try to
>>
>> *make sure all PC members attend the one we already have
>> *unburden the agenda a little by having email exchanges in advance about the Council agenda so that the calls would only have to focus on the pressing and/or complicated items, rather than walk through every one of them
>> *when needed, add a half hour onto the extant calls to ensure adequate time for discussion of items beyond the next Council meeting, e.g. WS, public comments and other outputs.
>>
>> It just seems to me that many of us already spend quite a bit of time on ICANN teleconferences, so before adding another to our regular diets we might want try to leverage the one we have.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing listPC-NCSG at ipjustice.orghttp://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing listPC-NCSG at ipjustice.orghttp://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Mar?lia Maciel*
> Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
> Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law
> School
> http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts
>
> DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu
> PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
> Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" -
> http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20141125/df3445a6/attachment.html>