[ccwg-internet-governance] Doodle poll to define call rotation: Double/Tripe
Stephane Van Gelder Consulting
svg at stephanevangelder.com
Sun Jan 19 23:59:07 UTC 2014
I think Keith's suggestion is an excellent one for decision making in the
ICANN WG environment and would agree that it would make a sound base for
the development of a kind of "widely geo distributed WG" standard.
Stéphane Van Gelder
Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur
STEPHANE VAN GELDER CONSULTING
T (FR): +33 (0)6 20 40 55 89
T (UK): +44 (0)7583 457053
Follow us on Twitter: @stephvg and "like" us on Facebook:
On 19 January 2014 01:44, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> I have used that second reading method in some groups in the past,
> including in the GNSO Council during the days of Task Forces / Committees
> of the Whole.
> I thought it worked quite well for finding the consensus point without
> leaving anyone aside. As a method, I think it has to be accompanied by
> announcement and hopefully discussion on the list during the intervening
> time. Which of course was implicit in what you said.
> I want to mention a problem with doodle polls for time setting (I realize
> that is not this poll). Often we find out that the majority of the
> participants are located in one cluster of time zones, with a minority in
> others. If we use majoritarian thinking, the meetings still end up
> consistently at bad times for some. If we use a doodle poll for the
> decision, I suggest we take the best times in each of the relevant
> geographical clusters.
> On 18-Jan-14 19:12, Keith Davidson wrote:
>> 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.
>> 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.
>>> I will close the poll on Friday January 24^th .
>>> Thank you.
>>> *Renate De Wulf*
>>> Executive Assistant
>>> Rond Point Schuman 6,
>>> 1st floor
>>> B-1040 Brussels
>>> 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
>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ccwg-internet-governance