[CCWG-ACCT] Suggested change in working dynamics

James Gannon james at cyberinvasion.net
Fri Mar 4 07:54:52 UTC 2016

I would disagree strongly with this, plenary working with the leadership team must decide the division of work which can be then done in the subgroups this was how we worked in CWG. We already have a small workgroup who does management that is our leadership team.

Sent from my iPad

On 4 Mar 2016, at 07:46, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear All
It is a two steps process
1 . One Working Group  ( small  work plan Group ) will plan the works of other groups by dividing the tasks before us to a number  of the required manageable  groups
Then Plenary discuss and agreed on that , as appropriate
2.  Each one of the small group as agreed will work on the assigned tasks and report back to plenary for decision, advice and follow up actions

Sent from my iPhone

On 3 Mar 2016, at 23:06, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:

I read this as saying that each small group will plan its own work, not that there will be one small group that plans the work of all the small groups.  But if there is such a master planning group, I would like to be part of it.


On Thursday, March 3, 2016, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
Thank for the initiative
For it sounds reasonable
Pls kindly note that I wish to be in the group which start planning the tasks as outlined

Sent from my iPhone

On 3 Mar 2016, at 20:34, Le?n Felipe S?nchez Amb?a <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','leonfelipe at sanchez.mx');>> wrote:

Dear all,

Now that our WS1 phase is approaching conclusion we would like to suggest a change in dynamics of our work. We acknowledge that the volume of calls and email exchange during this first phase was exhaustive and we want to thank you and recognize all for your understanding and commitment.

What we want to propose for WS2 is a more distributed working method in order to leverage each of the member / participants skills while making the best use of everyone's time.

A possible approach, to be discussed in our Marrakech meeting, is to divide the work on the issues to be developed as part of WS2 into small groups that would be tasked to develop a working plan for each of the groups. These working plans would be presented to the CCWG plenary for discussion and approval. Once the group has approved the different working plans, including a comprehensive list of resources that would involve carrying out each group's work, each group will begin their work and be responsible for scheduling their meetings and updating the CCWG on a monthly basis. Working plans for each group should consider the use of technology in order to foster inclusive participation from the wider community and to diminish cost of carrying each group's work.

Our role as Co-Chairs would evolve to continue to provide facilitation assistance where needed and coordinate interaction between the various groups, the CCWG at large and ICANN Staff and Board.

We look forward to this new phase in our work and welcome your thoughts on this suggested way forward during our session tomorrow.

Kind regards,

Thomas, Mathieu and Le?n
CCWG Co-Chairs


Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160304/904b8aa2/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list