[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] MP3 recording of the SCI meeting - 11 February 2014

[Glen de Saint Géry]

Dear All,
Please find the MP3 recording of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 20:00 UTC.

http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-20140211-en.mp3
On page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#oct>feb
(transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page)

Attendees:
Ronald Andruff - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Primary - Chair
Angie Graves - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Alternate
Anne Aikman Scalese - Intellectual Property Constituency - Primary
Marie-Laure Lemineur - NPOC Alternative
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP
Greg Shatan - IPC - Alternate
Avri Doria - Non Commercial SG - Primary - Vice-Chair
Cintra Sooknanan: NPOC Primary - SCI Vice Chair
Amr Elsadr - NCUC Alternate
Apologies:
Thomas Rickert
Julie Hedlund
Mary Wong

ICANN Staff:
Marika Konings
Glen de Saint Géry


** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Kind regards,

Glen

Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org

Adobe Chat Transcript 11 February 2014

   Marika Konings:Welcome to the SCI meeting of 11 February 2014

  Ron A:Nice to see you Glen and Marika

  Ron A:just dialing in now...

  Marie-laure Lemineur:Hello

  Cintra Sooknanan1:Hello everyone

  Cintra Sooknanan1:Jamaica has a bob sled team!

  Marika Konings:Actually just noticed that Germany has pushed us to the 4th place now :-((

  Marika Konings:We'll need some more skating medals obviously ;-)

  Ron A:Still some days to go Marika! ;o)

  Cintra Sooknanan1:Thanks so much for the dial out Glen

  Glen de Saint Gery:my pleasure, sorry we had the wrong number Cintra!

  Cintra Sooknanan1:it was my mistake, but all good

  Amr Elsadr:Sorry I'm late. Dialling in now.

  Avri Doria:seems lik we should alwasy worry about making sense.

  Avri Doria:are we really openning this again?

  Avri Doria:we only have 1 level of full consensus, and one level of near consensus,.  all the others are not consensus at all.

  Avri Doria:and we call near consensus gnso consensus

  Avri Doria:i can speak, but my point is tangential

  Ron A:@ AVri: please do speak

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:The SCI could consider the following potential actions:*          Add a new Consensus Level defining "Consensus Against" to the GNSO WG Guidelines*            Without adding a new Consensus Level, clarify that the existing definition/description of "Consensus" includes situations appropriately determined to be "Consensus Against"*      In either case, determine if the current "Divergence" level needs to be amended, e.g.:- Does "Divergence" always equate to "No Consensus"?-            Does "Divergence" always mean there is a plurality of views?-    Does the current definition/description of "Divergence" require clarification or amendment?*   Determine that the current Consensus Levels are adequate to cover even the situation experienced by the IGO-INGO PDP WG.

  Ron A:@ Avri: good clarification of levels

  Marika Konings:From the SCI Charter: On a periodic timescale for all procedures and guidelines in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which procedures and guidelines should be reviewed)

  Marie-laure Lemineur:Cintra could you please speak louder or closer to the mic

  Marie-laure Lemineur:please?

  Marika Konings:which was preceded by: 'Its tasks include making recommendations'

  Amr Elsadr:@Avri + Marika: Yes..., the proposed changes on this excercise should probably address all the levels of consensus/decision-making, not just full consensus.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Is the straw poll a voting member or everyone?

  Marika Konings:@ Amr - if the SCI decides that changes are necessary...

  Avri Doria:poll question makes not sense to me.  i think it is broader that consensus against, but not as wide as the kettle of fish.

  Avri Doria:call it just decsions making level and not consensusus against and i will understand

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Not my intent -but how caqn you avoid it if you are looking at them relatively?

  Amr Elsadr:I just changed from and X to a check. Good thing Ron clarified what the X and check would be for. :)

  Amr Elsadr:*an X

  Marie-laure Lemineur:but narrow approach as a first step and than open at a later stage ?

  Marie-laure Lemineur:open discussion

  Avri Doria:a binary decsion ofn a multi-part decsion is bound to be problematic.  1 just consensus against, 2 negation of any of the decision level, 3 review of the over decsion making procedures in all their glory, 4, review of the wg guidelines

  Avri Doria:3. review of the other decsions making procedures in all their glory

  Avri Doria:i favor 2 or 3

  Amr Elsadr:@Marika: Thanks. Great recommendation to move forward.

  Avri Doria:i do not think i am on the sub team

  Cintra Sooknanan1:all good thanks for the direction

  Amr Elsadr:Will this be a closed or open meeting?

  Wolf Knoben:open

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks Wolf. I ask because it wasn't posted on the schedule of the BA meeting. I wasn't sure.

  Marika Konings:in two weeks, next meeting would be 25 February

  Amr Elsadr:Ah! Thanks. :)

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:THank you everyone!

  Marie-laure Lemineur:Thank you Ron and everyone

  Cintra Sooknanan1:thanks  have a great day

  Cintra Sooknanan1:bye



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/attachments/20140211/c5f15772/attachment.html>