[Gac-gnso-cg] PDP work track ..

[Mike O'Connor]

hi all,

i’m definitely in Marika’s camp - i don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past.

my reaction is more on the practical level — filling out that array of questions with any kind of detail is going to take many many hours.  i’m not sure we have the time/energy to tackle the analysis that way.  i’d like to explore options to streamline that series of questions down to something that the group could answer in one call per workstream.  otherwise i fear paralysis by analysis.

mikey


On Feb 26, 2014, at 5:14 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:

> As you might have expected, I disagree with Mikey on not going through the PDP questions. By not reviewing how current engagement takes place as part of the PDP process and trying to understand why it is not working, what improvements can be made to the existing process and/or what additional actions need to be taken, I think we miss an important part of the discussion. The PPT seems to already jump ahead to what possible improvements may look like without considering in depth why the current engagement opportunities do not meet the objectives. By not understanding the underlying reasons and addressing those, any new mechanisms are likely to meet the same fate…. Just my two cents.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> From: Mike O'Connor <mike at haven2.com>
> Date: Tuesday 25 February 2014 17:16
> To: Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>
> Cc: "gac-gnso-cg at icann.org" <gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] PDP work track ..
> 
> hi Manal and all,
> 
> 1)  i am fine with the idea of moving those last 2 columns out of the PDP early-engagement stream — either over to day-to-da, or UP a level.  it seems to me that those two ideas are useful for both workstreams.
> 
> 2)  it seems to me that we have quite a lot to discuss with our colleagues at the Singapore meeting.  so my thought would be to thin out our presentations to a few slides, skipping over any of the sections that we haven’t completed.
> 
> i’m also not convinced that we need to beat ourselves to death with all the questions that Marika is proposing.  ;-)    (sorry Marika)
> 
> m
> 
> On Feb 25, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg> wrote:
> 
>> Dear All ..
>>  
>> Reference to the above mentioned subject and the attached documents, I would like to kick-start the discussion with a couple of questions I have and would hand over to Mikey and Suzanne as the work leads:
>> 1.       Should the last 2 columns, namely 'Improve coordination between GAC/GNSO Secretariats' & 'Improve process awareness and notifications, both directions', be moved to the day-to-day co-operation discussion?
>> 2.       How are we going to structure our discussion online? We have 3 weeks left to Singapore and 6 options to discuss, fill in potential issues (I believe initially from the document prepared by Marika) and propose how each option would work in practice (I believe initially from Suzanne’s/US suggestion included in the document prepared by Marika) .. Those options may decrease to 4 if we decide to move the above mentioned 2 columns to our day-to-day discussion ..
>>  
>> Over to you Mikey and Suzanne ..
>>  
>> Kind Regards
>> --Manal
>>  
>>  
>> From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail
>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:07 PM
>> To: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
>> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Agenda for Tues. Feb. 25th cc ..
>>  
>> Dear All ..
>>  
>> Please find below the suggested agenda for tomorrow’s conference call ..
>>  
>> 1.       Day-to-day work track
>> (Working document prepared by Marika and Olof – Version circulated by Marika on Feb. 20th, 2014)
>>  
>> 2.       PDP work track
>> (Working document prepared by Mikey and Suzanne – Version circulated by Mikey on Feb. 20th, 2014)
>>  
>> 3.       Agree on material ready to be shared in preparation for Singapore
>> o   Active GNSO WGs (attached)
>> o   Mechanism for day-to-day co-operation (attached version – with unpopulated table)
>>  
>> 4.       Agree on expectations from both work tracks for the following call 
>> (Note: Next call scheduled for 11 March 2014, 14h00 UTC)
>>  
>> 5.       AOB
>>  
>> All referenced documents are attached for your convenience ..
>>  
>> Kind Regards
>> --Manal
>>  
>>  
>> <PDP Graphics - GAC-GNSO v5.ppt><GAC Engagement in GNSO PDP - MO questions[1].doc>
> 
> 
> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
> 


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20140226/e906ada5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3630 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20140226/e906ada5/smime-0001.p7s>