[Internal-cg] Extended session in Los Angeles

Patrik Fältström paf at frobbit.se
Thu Sep 18 11:55:51 UTC 2014

Joseph, thanks for these comments.

I am personally completely in agreement with the positive impact a meeting with GAC would have. So, I am not against such a meeting.

I was more thinking of how we should react to other requests, specifically requests from outside of the traditional ICANN sphere.

My suggestion for a light handed (internal) policy, to be executed by the chair of the ICG:

- ICG do not reach out to other organizations or constituencies to have meetings, except where so explicitly is warranted

- ICG is accepting invites for meetings from other organizations and constituencies

- Incoming invitations are evaluated by the chair, and if the goal of the meeting is clear, do not explicitly or implicitly confuse the existing communication channels between ICG and the community in question, and the logistics makes the meeting possible, then the chair can inform to ICG about the meeting invitation, and receive feedback from ICG members. Specifically from the individual(s) (if any) that in ICG is/are appointed by the group(s) in question.

- The ICG chair makes a decision, based on feedback from ICG members, on whether the meeting is to be accepted or not

- At the meeting the ICG chair or whoever the chair is delegating the role to, goes to the meeting and it should be requested that "as many ICG members as possible" (according to what logistics can handle) should be able to follow to the meeting

- The fact the meeting took place, agenda and light notes (transcripts not necessary) from the meeting should be recorded in the ICG records (i.e. sent to the ICG mailing list)

- Part from what is described above, where ICG is accepting meetings, all ICG member is encouraged to reach out and talk with as many communities and constituencies as possible, but then in a personal capacity


On 18 sep 2014, at 07:04, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com> wrote:

> Patrik, colleagues:
> Based on Heather's comments and my experience interacting with a number of governments not accustomed to the multistakeholder process in the Net Mundial meeting, I think there may be a justification for a separate meeting with GAC...  As much as I would prefer not to have such a separate meeting, I am not sure that they would actively participate in the extended forum your reference... We should be very specific however that is would be a one time accommodation to assist in acclimation to the process.  
> On the forum session, perhaps we could set aside 45 minutes as Q&A with communities?
> Joe
> On 9/18/2014 6:29 AM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>> All,
>> Alice has checked and confirmed we could extend the time for the open session in Los Angeles with 30 minutes, to 120 minutes.
>> The time is as follows (timezone local time in Los Angeles):
>> Thursday, 16 October.
>> Start time: 10:00
>> End time: 12:00
>> I will come back with an updated proposal for agenda.
>>    Patrik
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140918/5df148ac/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140918/5df148ac/signature.asc>

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list