[AT-Review] Work items

[Willie Currie]

Brian

I have the following:

Accountability refers to a process by which individuals and 
organizations are answerable for their actions, decisions and processes 
on an ongoing basis and for the consequences that follow from them.

Willie

Brian Cute wrote:
>
> Willie and Olivier,
>
>  
>
> Could you forward the text of the working definition that the Team put 
> together during our session.  I would like to include it in the 
> Preliminary Report before we post the Report.  Thanks.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Brian
>
>  
>
> *From:* olivier.muron at orange-ftgroup.com 
> [mailto:olivier.muron at orange-ftgroup.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, May 14, 2010 9:47 AM
> *To:* wcurrie at apc.org; briancute at afilias.info
> *Cc:* at-review at icann.org
> *Subject:* RE: [AT-Review] Work items
>
>  
>
> Willie, Brian, all,
>
>  
>
> I rephrased the first two questions. I don't feel at ease beginning 
> the consultation with " Do you think there is a problem...".  I think 
> it might be better to begin with a more neutral question."What is your 
> general assessment of...".
>
>  
>
> I added a general question on ICANN's commitment to the interests of 
> global Internet users,
>
>  
>
> Best,
>
>  
>
> Olivier
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *De :* at-review-bounces at icann.org 
> [mailto:at-review-bounces at icann.org] *De la part de* Willie Currie
> *Envoyé :* vendredi 14 mai 2010 15:20
> *À :* briancute at afilias.info
> *Cc :* at-review at icann.org
> *Objet :* Re: [AT-Review] Work items
>
> Brian, all
>
> Here is the latest version of the questions, with a reformulation of 
> question 4 by Fabio.
>
> Best
> Willie
>
>   Brian Cute wrote:
>
> RT,
>
> 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 15^th _ 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.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brian
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   
>  
> _______________________________________________
> AT-Review mailing list
> AT-Review at icann.org <mailto: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/20100514/e01e4b3c/attachment.html