[council] Questions for chair

Wed Nov 17 11:09:26 UTC 2010

Adrian,
if having a "platform" means that I should have a "list of support for, or
opposition to, controversial topics", then I do not have such a list.
In my view, as I said in my first reply to your question, the chair must
facilitate and help the council work and dynamics and should not be biased
towards "supporting or opposing controversial topics".
I consider all GNSO topics and projects as important.
Regards
Olga

2010/11/17 Adrian Kinderis <adrian at ausregistry.com.au>

> So you would like us to pursue you to secure our vote? Ummm..Sure… OK.
>
>
>
> I am not doubting how busy you are. All Councilors are volunteers and
> dedicate important parts of our time to work in the Council. I am not sure
> this is relevant.
>
>
>
> The term platform in the context that I raised it is best defined by
> Wikipedia;
>
>
>
> Party Platform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_platform)
>
>
>
> A *party platform*, also known as a manifesto<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto>,
> is a list of the actions which a political party<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party> supports
> in order to appeal to the general public for the purpose of having said
> party's candidates voted into office. This often takes the form of a list of
> support for, or opposition to, controversial topics. Individual topics are
> often called planks of the platform.
>
>
>
> I trust this helps.
>
>
>
> *Adrian Kinderis*
>
>
>
> *From:* Olga Cavalli [mailto:olgacavalli at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 17, 2010 9:55 PM
> *To:* Adrian Kinderis
> *Cc:* KnobenW at telekom.de; council at gnso.icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [council] Questions for chair
>
>
>
> Adrian,
> I am happy to discuss any ideas or views with all the stakeholders, no
> problem with that so feel free to ask me.
> The GNSO council list is useful as all the councilors have the chance to
> see the exchange of messages. Next conference call is another possible
> moment, or you can reach me by email or by phone if necessary.
> We are all busy as we all have our own activities, but since I was
> appointed to the GNSO three years ago I have devoted an important part of my
> time to my volunteer work in the council, as you can see it described in all
> the working groups and other activities I have been involved in.
> I would appreciate if you could clarify the concept "platform" included in
> your first message with questions to me.
> Best regards
> Olga
>
> 2010/11/17 Adrian Kinderis <adrian at ausregistry.com.au>
>
> Thanks for the response Olga, although I think you missed my question.
>
>
>
> Perhaps I’ll ask it a different way;
>
>
>
> Do you plan on meeting with other Stakeholder groups to discuss your view
> and ideas on Council Leadership and if so when? I am a little surprised that
> you should have to be asked quite frankly. I would have thought it was
> something that you would have sought out. Perhaps you can explain why you
> haven’t?
>
>
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
>
>
> I know you are busy!
>
>
>
> *Adrian Kinderis*
>
>
>
> *From:* KnobenW at telekom.de [mailto:KnobenW at telekom.de]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:34 PM
> *To:* olgacavalli at gmail.com; Adrian Kinderis
>
>
> *Cc:* council at gnso.icann.org
>
> *Subject:* AW: [council] Questions for chair
>
>
>
> Thanks Olga! I think this is also a valuable input for the Cartagena
> discussion on council role.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Wolf-Ulrich
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Von:* Olga Cavalli [mailto:olgacavalli at gmail.com]
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 16. November 2010 22:59
> *An:* Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; Adrian Kinderis
> *Cc:* council at gnso.icann.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [council] Questions for chair
>
> Hi,
> in relation with the questions sent by Adrian and Wolf, these are some
> comments and I am happy to further explain these ideas during the conference
> call next Friday.
>
> Adrian, my mission as a NonCom Appointee is to participate in GNSO with a
> neutral perspective placing the broad public interest ahead of any
> particular interests. In my view, a chair is a facilitator and a coordinator
> of the work of the GNSO, including all different interests and perspectives
> of all the council members and their stakeholder groups as well.
>
> As you may recall, we NCAs could be also non voting members of the GNSO,
> which is the case of Andrei now. So there could be even a non voting chair.
>
> I have shared working teams, drafting teams and several other activities in
> my three years serving the GNSO with almos all of the council members and
> dialogue has been always open, so I am happy to answer any other question or
> doubt you may have.
>
> I would apprecialte if you could clarify the concept "platform" included in
> your question.
>
>
> Wolf, for me the key issue in the future of GNSO is broaden its perspective
> through outreach.
>
> In the Constituency Operations Working Team that I have chaired as part of
> the GNSO restructuring process, we have produced a very interesting document
> about outreach that is now under final revision by the OSC and will soon
> will be available for GNSO revision. (Special thanks to Debbie Hughes that
> chaired the subworking team, Krista Papac, Claudio DiGangi, Rafik Dammak,
> Tony Harris and Michael Young for their active participation in drafting the
> document).
>
> If GNSO could broaden participation including a more diverse perspective
> and more active participation from a wider universe, then it would be easier
> to have more participants from different stakeholder groups into different
> projects.
>
> As we learned in the prioritization working group, where you were a very
> active member, all projects have their impact and are relevant and
> interesting for different councilors and for their stakeholdergroups. So if
> more representatives can actively participate in different activities then
> prioritization could be more a managerial issue than a problem of
> administrating lack of time and resources.
>
> In relation with your question on how to "avoid the council's position in
> the policy development process becoming more and more weakened?", again I
> think that the answer is having a GNSO with a broader perspective, and this
> could be achieved through an outreach effort.
>
> I will be happy to explain this further or answer other questions next
> Thrusday.
>
> Best regards
>
> Olga
>
>
>
> 2010/11/16 <KnobenW at telekom.de>
>
> I've 2 questions to both candidates:
>
>
>
>    1. I'd appreciate a statement from regarding action item 1. from our
>    last call (prioritization, see attached). Which specific efforts do you have
>    in mind in order to strengthen the council's ability and effectiveness in
>    organizing its work?
>    2. With respect to the fact that the board recently took decision on VI
>    without having received a specific council recommendation: which measures do
>    you have in mind to avoid the council's position in the policy development
>    process becoming more and more weakened?
>
> Thanks and regards
> Wolf-Ulrich
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Please note the following action items from our Council meeting one week
> ago:
>
> 1.      Assuming we dispense with the prioritization effort, Councilors are
> encouraged to communicate ideas on the Council mailing list on how to make
> decisions regarding whether or not to proceed on a project; the aim would be
> to compile a list of factors that can be used to make choices, and over time
> develop criteria for choosing projects and work items.
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20101117/d80bdd29/attachment.html>