All good points, tx Carlos!
Kathy

On 2/26/2016 12:49 PM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. wrote:
> Dear Kathy,
>
> I think it is an excellent question that deserves closer look and 
> discussion with David Olive. Some food for thought for development of 
> your proposal:
> * just the number of staff does not guarantee effectiveness for the 
> particular WG
> ** the exploding number of separate wikis spaces for all those new 
> initiatives duplicates, if not dilutes information and we are about to 
> need an internal search engine and relational data base of documents 
> that i don’t see in the Budget
> *** as the CCWG ACCt as assumed power parity between all SO/ACs, it is 
> worth asking if they all have information parity and all can work 
> based on a level playing field in terms of access to information
> **** but under access to information I don´t mean only to have access 
> to the wiki-spaces and some staff helping to coordinate calls and 
> basic drafts
> ***** some recent initiatives have had access to enormous outside 
> resources dire cutely contracted by ICANN Staff (lawyers on 
> accountability, regional DNS market studies for Middle East, LatAm and 
> Africa, but also Nielsen and Analysis for the competition review) and 
> I´m not sure there is a plan that all this investment is going to be 
> accesible at the fingertips of every person who is not a dedicated 
> volunteer and has spent at least 5 years in the ICANN world.
> *********……….
>
> Cheers
>
>
> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
> +506 8837 7176
> Skype: carlos.raulg
> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
> On 26 Feb 2016, at 6:16, Kathy Kleiman wrote:
>
>> I would like to talk with them about work flow. ICANN has hired 100 
>> policy staffers in the last year and has an enormous new capability 
>> for work flow, but we do not. There is no way to keep up with what is 
>> "in the queue" and "coming down the pike."
>>
>> I would expressly invite David Olive (as lead of ICANN's Policy 
>> Development Support Team) to be part of this discussion as well. How 
>> do we make the work load reasonable if we want the volunteer, 
>> multistakeholder model to continue? Is it based on ICANN capacity or 
>> stakeholder capacity?
>>
>> Best,
>> Kathy
>>
>> On 2/26/2016 6:10 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> One regular event at ICANN meetings is that we get to meet the Board,
>>> talk with them about and ask them whatever we want.
>>>
>>> The Board would, however, like to know in advance what we're going
>>> to ask them, so they could better prepare for it.
>>>
>>> If you have suggestions for topics for our meeting with the Board in
>>> Marrakech, please let me know as soon as possible (feel free to post
>>> to the list or me directly, as you prefer).
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>