[AT-Review] Work items
Peter Dengate Thrush
peter.dengatethrush at icann.org
Fri May 14 03:04:30 UTC 2010
I think the subcommittee idea is likely to be very helpful in getting the work done.
Given my conflicts, I would prefer not to be on any particular team, but stand ready to help - perhaps mostly as liaison- with all groups, in any fashion that I can.
I hope that will be helpful.
On May 14, 2010, at 11:11 AM, Brian Cute wrote:
> Our most immediate work item is the draft questions for the Community that were drafted by Cheryl, Olivier and Willie. We have a deadline of May 15th to submit the questions for posting. Please review the questions and post any proposed edits so we can meet this deadline.
> Looking forward, since paragraph 9.1 of the AoC has 5 areas of review (the Board, the GAC, public input, public support of decisions and policy development process), I suggest that we establish “sub-committees” headed by two members of the RT who oversee the work of each area of review. The two responsible members would ensure that the review work remains focused and aligned with the RT’s methodology and on time for deliverables in December. The sub- committee approach would not prevent any RT member from participating directly in the work of any of the 5 areas of review – it is intended to ensure organization and efficiency given our the limited number of members on the RT.
> If this approach is acceptable, please think about the area that you would like to volunteer for and indicate that in advance of our next scheduled call. The Doodle for our next call is almost complete. If you haven’t indicated your availability, please do so and we will send out the meeting maker and telephone bridge.
> AT-Review mailing list
> AT-Review at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AT-Review