[CCWG-ACCT] Work plan in January

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Co-Chairs
Thank you very much for information,
I am doubtful about the efficiency of discussing a given Rec. in a large group as plenary ?
Moreover, any such discussion requires preparation of a working document containing the initial/ original version of the Rec.+ comments received from Board and from public in a consolidated document available at least 48 hours before the meeting.
Then we need a topic Leader apart from Co-Chairs to present the consolidated Rec. and take follow up action to implement changes agreed.
We also need to further examine the revised version again to finalise it.
As for the Board 's comments we need to formally ask the Board to designate its full authorise representatives to negotiate with CCWG.
As for the of meeting  and the duration of each meeting,   the issue  should be discussed at the first meeting.
As the deadline , complete the tasks, once again please DO NOT RUSH AND BE PRUDENT .
There is no deadline at all.
There was some objective time line and thus we should be quite mindful that any  changes we made must
1. Have full consensus among us including Board and
2 . Must be published in one way or other for public comments .
The latter is inevitable.
Regards
Kavouss             
Sent from my iPhone

> On 30 Dec 2015, at 10:50, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
> 
> Dear Kavouss, Dear Paul, All,
> 
> Some of you have raised concerns about the work plan and the decision to
> schedule two calls a week, announced in my 24th December email.
> 
> Participants to our meeting #73 will remember that this issue was
> discussed during that call
> (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56986612). Key
> take away was the need for plenary discussions rather than multiplying
> subgroups.
> 
> While we certainly recognize the different views expressed about the
> timeline for delivering our final report, we are also trying to organize
> our calls in a manner that enables inclusive and informed debate about the
> comments received. 24 hours of calls in January "only" represent two hours
> of discussions per recommendation (leaving aside other types of issues
> that we dedicate time on during our calls). Two hours to fully understand
> concerns and find a way forward that is acceptable to all.
> 
> We hope that, by using a topic based agenda and providing a thorough
> analysis of the comments received ahead of the call, we can make the best
> use of everyone's time during these calls, so that they can remain driven
> by the willingness to understand each of the concerns in good faith and
> find common ground, as we have demonstrated in the past that our group can
> do.
> 
> If needed and desired within the group, we might have to rely on intensive
> days (possibly on a week end) as some of you suggested, but we are aware
> of the challenges of such an approach and would like to avoid that as much
> as possible.
> 
> As a follow up to the discussion that took place during our meeting #73,
> we will put these proposals for discussion during our next meeting, on
> January 5th, and look forward to your further contributions and
> suggestions.
> 
> Best regards,
> Leon, Thomas & Mathieu