[council] can somebody remind me what the "Teresa Swinehart Update" item is on Sunday?

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I guess I still consider it a useful bag of tricks we can dig into 
anytime we start figuring out how to do something.

I do not think there is any obligation on the GNSO, or anyone else for 
that matter, to use the content of panel reports unless they look useful.

And despite being a Ms.Grinch, though perhaps not the grinchiest grinch, 
on this whole panel idea, I think there are bunches of ideas worth 
thinking about.

avri

On 19-Mar-14 21:00, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> hi all,
>
> one of the nice things about a poor memory, that is failing, is the
> frequent opportunity to go “oh!  i remember now!”  :-)
>
> oh!  i remember now!
>
> by the way — i also can’t remember if i shared this little thought
> exercise i did on an earlier draft of their recommendations — the
> details are wrong now (i haven’t had time to really grind through their
> final draft, that’s airplane reading) but the concept still works for
> me.  i’ve attached that little picture to this note.
>
> i think their stuff is fine — but i want to evaluate the
> relevance/usefulness of their proposals along at least three continuums:
>
> Goals <—> Tools
>
> Participation <—>  Policy Making
>
> Working Groups <—> SG/Constituencies
>
> the little picture i’ve attached only does two dimensions, i thought of
> the third one later.  there may well be more.
>
> their work would have been improved by having a few knowledgeable people
> selected as part of the “expert working group", but hey that’s true for
> almost all of them.  we’ve *got* to defend that “working group” brand
> better in the future.
>
> thanks all.
>
> mikey
>
> PS.  sorry for throwing the NCSG under the bus — i’m quoted as saying
> that they would be a great place to experiment with Liquid Democracy.
>   nope, i don’t remember saying that (see how handy a failing memory
> is?), but in that particular instance i also can’t imagine *why* i would
> have said it.  i’ll own the words, there’s no unringing that bell.
>   however...
>
> i bet what i *meant* to say, and which i think might be true, is that
> the *constituencies and SGs of the non-contracted parties house* of the
> GNSO might be a good place to try some of those things out.  mostly,
> what i was trying to get at is that there are some places where some of
> those ideas would be a Really Bad Idea (working groups, and the
> Contracted Parties House).  we non-contracted SG/constituencies have a
> need to broaden our reach and do a better job of preparing people to be
> effective participants in WGs. some of these ideas might be good things
> to experiment with.  but i like to put myself in the boat with everybody
> else, not throw some of us under the bus.  sorry about that.
>
>
>
> On Mar 19, 2014, at 6:58 AM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-Systems.net
> <mailto:vgreimann at key-Systems.net>> wrote:
>
>> One topic that may be worth raising during the discussion is whether
>> the work of the panels will be expanded to take into account the
>> recent developments. I am particularly interested, how ICANN can
>> develop and implement a truly bottom-up, multistakeholder
>> accountability structure. Is accountability even an issue for the
>> strategy panels? It should be...
>>
>>
>> Volker
>>
>> Am 19.03.2014 12:41, schrieb john at crediblecontext.com:
>>> Mikey,
>>> Recall that we originally sought to have Beth Novack, the chair of
>>> the Multi-Stakeholder Innovation Strategy Panel attend so that there
>>> might be a Q-and-A.  This was driven by the initial set of proposals
>>> from the Panel and the emergence of "crowdsourcing" as a legitimate
>>> way to make policy.
>>> Staff will be standing in.
>>> Berard
>>>
>>>     --------- Original Message ---------
>>>     Subject: Re: [council] can somebody remind me what the "Teresa
>>>     Swinehart Update" item is on Sunday?
>>>     From: "David Cake" <dave at difference.com.au>
>>>     Date: 3/18/14 9:23 pm
>>>     To: "Mike O'Connor" <mike at haven2.com>
>>>     Cc: "Council" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>>>
>>>     Theresa will be updating us on the MSI panels work before we have
>>>     our open discussion about them.
>>>     David
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 19 Mar 2014, at 4:33 am, Mike O'Connor <mike at haven2.com
>>>     <mailto:mike at haven2.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         this is mostly aimed at David Cake or Jonathan.  but any/all
>>>         are welcome to help out.
>>>         i’m looking at that Teresa Swinehart Update item on Sunday
>>>         morning just before the Strat Panel section.  i can’t
>>>         remember what she’s updating us *about*  can somebody remind me?
>>>         sorry to be so dense,
>>>         mikey
>>>
>>>
>>>         PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com
>>>         <http://www.haven2.com/>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter,
>>>         Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
>>>
>>
>
>
> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com
> <http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook,
> LinkedIn, etc.)
>