[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Brief Explanation of Proposed Group Agreements for LA F2F session

[Mary Wong]

Dear WG members,

Thanks to everyone who has already sent in their votes for their ³top two²
topics that they believe should be prioritized for discussion at the face to
face facilitated session in LA on 10 October. For those who have not yet
done so, please let me know your topic selections as soon as you can.

I thought it might also be helpful to provide a brief explanation of the
proposed ³group agreement² principles we sent around. First of all, please
do not interpret these as final ­ they are all subject to discussion as the
idea is for them (or any others that are ultimately adopted) to be the
product of group agreement, so as to facilitate greater collaboration, focus
and likelihood of success. This may be something that we can take up further
during the WG meeting tomorrow, for instance (for which we will be sending
out a draft agenda shortly as well). Essentially, any and all ³group
agreements² are the product of consensus and agreed on prior to any
substantive work or discussions.

Secondly, on the specific suggestion of ³no laptops or phones², this was
included on the list of proposals because our experience with this type of
facilitated face to face sessions ­ including at a senior executive staff
training session and at the first ICANN Academy event ­ has shown that this
is one of the best ³ground rules² for ensuring that everyone is focused and
present, and fully contributing to the discussion.  As I noted above, this ­
like all the others ­ is a proposal subject to group discussion and
agreement, and the group can therefore agree to (a) use the rule as
proposed; (b) reject the rule entirely; (c) use the rule with exceptions; or
(d) something else. Should (c) be the group¹s choice, then part of that
agreement might include agreed exceptions such as the ones Don, Kiran and
Paul have listed.

We also note the point made by Kristina and Kiran about communicating
privately, whether with others in the room or who are participating
remotely. Our thought on this was that one major objective of a face to face
session is to have everyone contribute to the group conversation ­ to that
end, while a session may (subject to physical facilities and other
limitations) break out into small groups and such, the preferred dynamic
when the group is together (as we anticipate this WG mostly to be in LA) is
for everyone to speak publicly unless a request is made for a more private
caucus. We have planned to have a staff member keep an eye on questions and
comments from remote participants for that reason.

I hope this clarifies the document in question and look forward to the
group¹s discussion on these proposed principles.

Thanks and cheers
Mary

Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
Email: mary.wong at icann.org






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140929/230fff88/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5033 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140929/230fff88/smime.p7s>