[council] SubPro IRT Liaisons

[Anne ICANN]

Thanks Greg.  I'm sure Susan and I both applaud the goal of obtaining
efficiencies in the IRT process.  Many on the Sub Pro IRT have been urging
more than one work track in order to accomplish the goals more quickly.  We
have also noted expressions from some on Council that any more than two
work tracks would be hard for some constituencies/stakeholder groups to
follow.

Thank you for the considerations expressed by Leadership. I think Council
will find that Susan and I working together in this role will actually lead
to more productive time at the Council level, as was hopefully demonstrated
by the work we put forward on the SPIRT in yesterday's extraordinary
Council meeting.

We appreciate your bringing this decision to a conclusion prior to ICANN77.
Thank you,
Anne

Anne Aikman-Scalese
GNSO Councilor
NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
anneicanngnso at gmail.com


On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 8:30 AM DiBiase, Gregory via council <
council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:

> Dear Councilors,
>
>
>
> From our May meeting, we captured an action item to seek non-objection on
> the email list to have both Anne Aikman-Scalese and Susan Payne serve as
> joint liaisons to the New Round Policy Implementation (also known as the
> SubPro IRT). *Please comment no later than 9 June if you object.*
>
>
>
> As the concept of two liaisons to an IRT is a bit of a novel approach, the
> Council leadership team would like to introduce a couple of other
> considerations. Having two liaisons may introduce complexities and delays,
> especially if the two liaisons are intending to perform the role in the
> same manner. For instance, determining what information needs to be
> conveyed between the IRT and Council, or assessing consensus to raise an
> issue to Council, all becomes more challenging with two decision makers
> (who besides having to coordinate their actions, may also disagree with
> each other). Therefore, if there is an opportunity, the liaisons should
> seek ways to divide their work and gain efficiencies if possible and not
> simply have two individuals carrying out the same role. We recognize that
> the IRT is very much in its early stages, but we will welcome an update
> from the two liaisons in due time, assuming no objections to them being
> seated as co-liaisons, on how they might try and optimize the situation.
>
>
>
> Again, because this is a novel approach for the Council liaison to an IRT,
> leadership would also recommend assessing in six months whether co-liaisons
> are helpful, benign, or disadvantageous. Leadership of course welcomes
> input on these additional considerations.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Greg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20230606/dc69405e/attachment.html>