[council] Informal conversation

[Stéphane Van Gelder]

Good point Mary, I forgot the topic of a liaison. They say they can't do that, but actually suggest the reverse, i.e. that we send them a liaison!

An interesting suggestion…

Stéphane



Le 27 oct. 2011 à 16:39, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> a écrit :

> Hmm ... isn't this one very good reason why we ought to have GNSO-GAC liaisons? 
> 
> Also, while I understand the difficulty the GAC may have with nit having one or two people represent the GAC formally, should we consider inviting them to appoint an observer or liaison to the task force or WG that Jeff is leading?
> 
> Thanks for the prompt action and reporting back, Stéphane.
> 
> Cheers
> Mary
> 
> "Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder at indom.com>" <stephane.vangelder at indom.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> As we discussed during today's wrap-up, I had an informal conversation with the GAC.
> 
> I passed along the message that there was disappointment at the GAC's apparent lack of desire for a common effort on the IOC and RC names. The answer was that the GAC remains extremely challenged when it comes to participating in joint efforts of this kind. There are workload issues first and foremost for government reps, but also because of the unique nature of the GAC it is difficult for any GAC member to participate effectively.
> 
> The point was also made to me that we tend to assume that when we put something out, either on our mailing list or our website, that is enough for the GAC to be aware of it. I was told that it is not so, and that there is no substitute for direct communication. So in that regard, it sounds like our discussions in today's wrap-up about being seen to be more constructive and more proactive are spot on.
> 
> With that in mind, I would suggest that we perhaps want to send the draft letter on the IOC and RC names anyway. The idea being to show that we have done some thinking about this issue as well (someone made that point during the wrap-up, I forget who so apologies).
> 
> Also, I was told that unless we write to the GAC to tell them about the announcement made by ICANN and the registrars and published on the GNSO mailing list, they don't know about it. As this is a registrar specific issue, it is perhaps not for the GNSO as a whole to mention. But it is perhaps worth thinking about.
> 
> The main takeaway I got from the conversation is that we should look to improve the way we communicate with the outside world (this is not something I was told, it is my own conclusion).
> 
> Hope this is helpful.
> 
> Get home safe everyone. Enjoyed working with you this week.
> 
> Stéphane
>