[At-review] FW: First thoughts

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]

Thanks Fabio  I've taken the liberty of treating your First Thought :
Initial reflections document that same way as we did Manal's i.e. creating
an editable google doc & copying the doc (and making a text copy of your
email's explanatory  body text) across to the wave repository as well as a
few of us have joined there already... and at least in the absence of agreed
 tools this means we are being consistent in our temporary measures.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr
(CLO)



On 14 April 2010 21:33, Marco Lorenzoni <marco.lorenzoni at icann.org> wrote:

>  Forwarded to the list for ease of reference; when replying please use the
> list email: at-review at icann.org
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
> Marco Lorenzoni
>
> ---------------------
>
> ICANN
>
> Director, Organizational Review
>
> marco.lorenzoni at icann.org
>
> Phone: +32.2.234 78 69
>
> Mobile: +32.475.72 47 47
>
> Fax: +32 2 234 7848
>
> Skype: marco_lorenzoni
>
> ---------------------
>
> 6, Rond Point Schuman
> B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Fabio Colasanti [mailto:fabio at colasanti.it]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 14 April, 2010 12:49
> *To:* 'Manal Ismail'; 'Cheryl Langdon-Orr'; 'Janis Karklins'; Alice
> Jansen; peter.dengatethrush at icann.org; lstrickling at ntia.doc.gov;
> wadelman at godaddy.com; Becky.Burr at wilmerhale.com; wcurrie at apc.org;
> briancute at afilias.info; louie at equinix.com;
> olivier.muron at orange-ftgroup.com; zhangxinsheng at miit.gov.cn;
> FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov; wangliang at catr.cn; latlas at ntia.doc.gov; Marco
> Lorenzoni
> *Subject:* First thoughts
>
>
>
> Dear team members,
>
> Following Manal's excellent initiative yesterday, I would also like to
> share some initial thoughts on the issues we started to touch on yesterday.
> These are set out in the attached note on which I would very much welcome
> comments. The main points I would like to make are:
>
> * The AoC already sets out detail the purpose of the group and the expected
> "deliverables". I don't think therefore that we need to spend too much
> additional time on drafting a separate terms of reference.
>
> * We only have just over 8 months to finalise recommendations. It is
> important therefore that we quickly adopt a relatively simple (and hopefully
> transparent!) methodology,. My concern is the danger that we could spend a
> significant amount of time developing a complex approach, thereby reducing
> the time we will have available to execute it.
>
> * The main input that we should seek for our work should be public comment
> and the views of the various supporting organisations and advisory committee
> members. The use of indicators and "quantitative and qualitative data" can
> be useful but we should only consider data already available to ICANN staff
> - we do not really have the time to start original research or even to
> instruct someone else to do it.
>
> ** The main task facing us is to hear the concerns that people have,
> decide to what extent they appear to be legitimate and, if possible, make
> recommendations about what ICANN can do to improve the situation*.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Fabio
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-review mailing list
> At-review at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-review
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/at-review/attachments/20100415/83a99b17/attachment.html