[ccwg-internet-governance] Doodle poll to define call rotation: Double/Tripe

Marilyn Cade marilynscade at hotmail.com
Sun Jan 19 00:35:19 UTC 2014


Keith, your counsel is much appreciated. We probably can't delay past two meetings, however, for the work for the Brazil meeting.  
I also posted to the list earlier that I support a face to face in Singapore, and a session for the CCWG with the fuller community. 
I also want to remind others that I also asked if it is possible to have a f-f in Geneva IF ENOUGH members are in attendance, and remote participation can be ensured.  ISOC offices in Geneva could provide a possible host for such a gathering. It would need to be 'out of other commitments', so probably in evening. 
Again, I want to say this clearly: IF enough CCWG participants are going to be in Geneva. 
Marilyn Cade

> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 13:12:03 +1300
> From: keith at internetnz.net.nz
> To: ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Doodle poll to define call rotation: Double/Tripe
> 
> Thanks very much Renate for organising this poll, and to the WG members 
> for having consideration for those of us who live in unusual time zones.
> 
> As an aside, one ICANN WG that I chair has for the past 5 years been 
> meeting almost every 2 weeks on a triple rotation meeting time. As 
> chair, I refuse to allow significant decisions to be made on the basis 
> of a single call, so have a "second reading" on a next call to confirm 
> earlier decisions, and if there is dissent on the second reading, then 
> taking it forward to a third meeting. The massive benefit from this 
> approach is that all WG members can exempt themselves from participating 
> in the one out of three meetings that happens at a truly horrible time 
> for them, and are not denied a voice in the decision making along the 
> way. With all calls recorded and transcripts created, members can go 
> back to review what the points of difference were on controversial 
> issues etc.
> 
> While this does potentially slow down the progress on topics a little, 
> it does ensure a robustness of debate and a commitment to all 
> participants being able to contribute. The outcome is usually a higher 
> level of consensus and understanding of the issues.
> 
> I have often thought this methodology could be adopted as a standard for 
> larger WG's who's members are geographically widely dispersed.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Keith
> 
> On 17/01/2014 10:25 p.m., Renate DeWulf wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > One of the open action items was to define whether this ccwg would wish
> > to hold its weekly calls on a double or triple rotation.
> >
> > Please find hereunder the link to this poll.
> >
> > http://www.doodle.com/z4r372tn453ez349
> >
> > I will close the poll on Friday January 24^th .
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Best,
> > Renate
> >
> > *Renate De Wulf*
> >
> > Executive Assistant
> >
> > ICANN
> >
> > Rond Point Schuman 6,
> >
> > 1st floor
> >
> > B-1040 Brussels
> >
> > Belgium
> >
> > Telephone: +32 2 894 7411
> >
> > Mobile: +32 479 40 07 44
> >
> > Fax: +32 2 280 1221
> >
> > Skype: renate.dewulf
> >
> > Email: renate.dewulf at icann.org <mailto:renate.dewulf at icann.org>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> > ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20140118/c053e4c6/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list