[council] ccNSO Council meeting report

[Klaus Stoll]

I think it would be a good idea to have someone reliable and knowledge 
to report back and the ex councilor idea seems also a good one. I second 
to put this proposal for discussion at the weekend in Singapore.

Klaus

   On 12/11/2013 6:03 PM, John Berard wrote:
> The idea to fund a ccNSO liaison from among the GNSO Councillors 
> leaving their seat has been floated but little discussed.  Perhaps we 
> ought to put it on the weekend agenda for Singapore
>
> Berard
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 11, 2013, at 8:33 AM, Maria Farrell <maria.farrell at gmail.com 
> <mailto:maria.farrell at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> Many thanks for this summary and indeed for getting up at 0400 to be 
>> able to provide it to us.
>>
>> I agree with your suggestion, and David's support, for a funded 
>> liaison person who can attend ccNSO and- David's suggestion - GAC 
>> meetings that run at the same time as ours. It could be a useful 
>> first step to figuring out how to implement the ATRT2 recommendation 
>> that we somehow get the GAC more active in GNSO PDPs.
>>
>> I wonder how we would go about discussing that in more detail in the 
>> GNSO and, if appropriate, getting the idea into the works?
>>
>> That said, I personally think you're doing a terrific job keeping us 
>> informed about cc-world and it is really useful to get these updates 
>> from you, with your day to day knowledge of GNSO Council issues, e.g. 
>> the cross community working group. You are in danger of making 
>> yourself indispensable!
>>
>> Maria
>>
>>
>> On 11 December 2013 02:05, David Cake <dave at difference.com.au 
>> <mailto:dave at difference.com.au>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On 11 Dec 2013, at 7:38 am, john at crediblecontext.com
>>     <mailto:john at crediblecontext.com> wrote:
>>     > 4.  As the GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO Council, I have
>>     already suggested, because we meet at the same times during the
>>     three international meetings, that someone just off the Council
>>     be asked to fill the role.  This brings up a question of funding.
>>      I think the position should be funded and a specific set of
>>     responsibilities attached.  I am just making this up as I go along.
>>
>>             Regardless, it seems a valuable suggestion. We have the
>>     same issue with the GAC - the major SOs and ACs are all more or
>>     less so busy that they consume almost all the time available at
>>     an ICANN meeting, making it pretty much impossible to effectively
>>     monitor one if you are an active participant in another. Liaisons
>>     are seeming a more valuable idea with each meeting, and it seem a
>>     practical necessity that they are not full serving members of the
>>     origin group in order to have the time to fully monitor the group
>>     they are outreaching to. And of course funding is important, as
>>     the ability to attend physical meetings is essential for the role.
>>
>>             Cheers
>>
>>                     David
>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20131212/73eed871/attachment.html>