[PC-NCSG] ICANN 53 Constituency Day - Seeking Feedback for ICANN board

Matthew Shears mshears
Fri Jul 10 16:58:12 EEST 2015


Ed, good suggestions.

Happy to take a role in the Board discussion in Dublin assuming adequate 
time to deliberate the issue we would want to discuss.

Matthew

On 7/10/2015 5:42 AM, Edward Morris wrote:
> I actually think we may be spending too much time with "friendlies" 
> and not enough time with the others. I had reasonably long 
> conversations with Kuo-Wei and Asha and they don't know a heck of a 
> lot about us. I also question whether some of our friendlies correctly 
> interpret things: for example, the idea the Board would be open to a 
> restructuring that would consolidate NC interests in one unit is so 
> far from reality that I'm not sure how anyone could reasonably believe 
> that. Strategically I also would prioritize members of the BGC: they 
> are more important to us than other members on structural matters.
>
> We did not take full advantage of the new structure. The Board was 
> looking more for a conversation and we were playing, according to more 
> than one of them, gotcha. I've been told the other groups warmed to 
> the new structure and we did not. It doesn't matter whether this is 
> true is not, that's the perception of some and in this case perception 
> is a reality we need to deal with.
>
> At the PC meeting Bill proposed new faces for our leads, something 
> that really did not happen. I think that was a good idea. I also think 
> we should use the opportunity less to tell the Board what to think and 
> more to listen to what and why they think what they do. Conceive of it 
> as a first date. Those usually go better when you listen to the other 
> person and give her (or he, as the case may be) the chance to speak 
> and explain instead of spending the time telling the person how great 
> you are and what to think. Both sides need more humility and a desire 
> to listen to the other. How you do that with folks like Chris on the 
> Board and some of our strong voices on stage I do not know.
>
> In terms of structure I think we may want to break the session down to 
> three sortable parts with different people. Let's give the Board a 
> chance to see the diversity of the NCSG rather than just telling them 
> we are diverse. Question 1 have 4 of us at the table, short break, 
> question 2 a different 4 and so on. Physically change the people in 
> the hope of rekindling the interest of Board members. It's a long day 
> and we're at the end of it. The CSG did something like this and I'm 
> told it worked well. We also should make the seating more Board - NCSG 
> - Board, instead of having some of us sitting together. And leave the 
> PC's off...we can live without chat or email for an hour. This should 
> be a strict rule for both sides.
>
> Just some thoughts...
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 10, 2015, at 10:03 AM, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com 
> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> It would be good to send our draft questions to Markus, Wolfgang and 
>> maybe one or two other friendlies in advance of finalizing to get a 
>> sense how they?d be received etc.  Having a follow up breakfast on 
>> the Sunday or Monday might also be useful.  Somehow we have to change 
>> the dynamic, the seating wasn?t sufficient.  At the same time, we 
>> don?t want to exclude important questions just because someone might 
>> get their feathers ruffled for varying unpredictable reasons, but at 
>> least we could go into this more cluefully.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 3:00 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sam,
>>>
>>> thanks for the comments.
>>> we have usually the meeting in ICANN meeting Thursday with the GNSO 
>>> elected board members and that is really productive. shall we have 
>>> another breakfast or another kind of meeting with few board members 
>>> instead of the cocktail ( which happens by rotation anyway).
>>>
>>> @Others  please share your input, same for the thread about 
>>> prioritisation.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> 2015-07-10 4:50 GMT+09:00 Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca 
>>> <mailto:lanfran at yorku.ca>>:
>>>
>>>     We have been discussing this in NPOC and my position on this is
>>>     that the alcohol fueled receptions (large or small) are inferior
>>>     to roundtable discussions face-to-face with two or three Board
>>>     Members. As for the whole board session, that has the look and
>>>     feel of a dog-and-pony show where everything is pro forma and
>>>     there is no real dialogue, no matter how good is the question or
>>>     comment.
>>>
>>>     I would prefer the 2-3 Board member face-to-face meetings, and
>>>     reserve a cocktail party for the end-of-meetings ramp down.
>>>
>>>     Sam
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 2015-07-08 7:26 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>>>     Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>>     we received this request for input about the joint session we
>>>>     had with the board in BA meeting.
>>>>
>>>>     We had also the opportunity to talk about when we met Bruce and
>>>>     Markus, getting some reactions about the meeting, the topics
>>>>     and how we may improve things.
>>>>
>>>>     I think there was agreement that we should work out better our
>>>>     questions/topics to avoid looking controversial (not sure how
>>>>     we can assess that), and trying to liaise with Markus first to
>>>>     hash out the topics and/or having pre-meeting confcall to
>>>>     prepare for the session. that means more work for us but it can
>>>>     also mean having a better outcome and being more action-oriented.
>>>>
>>>>     we can comment about the format and the changes. my initial
>>>>     comment was that the board self-defeated the purpose of getting
>>>>     earlier the topics when it didn't respond till on month after
>>>>     receiving them and few days before the meeting.
>>>>
>>>>     please share you thoughts and input that you think we should
>>>>     send to board.
>>>>
>>>>     Best,
>>>>
>>>>     Rafik
>>>>
>>>>     ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>     From: *Megan Bishop* <megan.bishop at icann.org
>>>>     <mailto:megan.bishop at icann.org>>
>>>>     Date: 2015-07-09 4:54 GMT+09:00
>>>>     Subject: ICANN 53 Constituency Day - Seeking Feedback
>>>>     To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>>>     <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>, "william.drake at uzh.ch
>>>>     <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>" <william.drake at uzh.ch
>>>>     <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>>, "rudi.vansnick at isoc.be
>>>>     <mailto:rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>" <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be
>>>>     <mailto:rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>>
>>>>     Cc: David Olive <david.olive at icann.org
>>>>     <mailto:david.olive at icann.org>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Dear All,
>>>>
>>>>     Following on from the roundtable experiment at Constituency Day
>>>>     in Buenos Aires, the ICANN Board is interested to hear feedback
>>>>     from you and your groups on how the changes were received, and
>>>>     what areas can be improved upon.  Another element we?d like
>>>>     feedback on is the rotating schedule of informal cocktail
>>>>     receptions.  Please let us hear your feedback on that as well.
>>>>
>>>>     I will collect all comments/suggestions received and send them
>>>>     on to the Board in preparation for ICANN 54 in Dublin.
>>>>
>>>>     Kind regards,
>>>>     Megan
>>>>
>>>>     Megan Bishop
>>>>     Board Support Coordinator
>>>>     Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>>>>
>>>>     12025 Waterfront Dr., Suite 300
>>>>     Los Angeles, CA 90094
>>>>     Mobile: +1-310-795-1894 <tel:%2B1-310-795-1894>
>>>>     Direct: +1-310-301-5808 <tel:%2B1-310-301-5808>
>>>>
>>>>     /One World. One Internet./
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>     PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>>     PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>>>>     http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>>     -- 
>>>
>>>     *--------------------------------------------*
>>>     "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
>>>     in an unjust state" -Confucius
>>>     ----------------------------------------------
>>>     Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
>>>     Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
>>>     YorkU email:Lanfran at Yorku.ca <mailto:Lanfran at Yorku.ca>    Skype: slanfranco
>>>     blog:http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com <http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com/>
>>>     Phone: 613 476-0429 cell: 416-816-2852
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-- 
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 (0)771 247 2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20150710/f2f33839/attachment-0001.html>



More information about the NCSG-PC mailing list