-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
 
Hi - sharing this from the chair of the GNSO council in case you have
any comments for councillors before the next meeting.
Sorry for the delay in passing it on, but i understand there is still
time to comment.

Kind regards
Joy Liddicoat


- -------- Original Message --------
Subject:     [council] ICANN Durban - GNSO Council meeting with the Board
Date:     Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:48:48 +0100
From:     Jonathan Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:     <[log in to unmask]>
Organisation:     Afilias
To:     <[log in to unmask]>



All,

 

As you know, Durban is approaching and we have the great opportunity of
an hour and a half with the ICANN Board.

 

*Background*

 

In my time on the Council, our meetings with the board have mostly
comprised an agenda made up from topics sent in both directions which
the Council has then worked to develop our position on, typically on the
Saturday of the weekend session.  I feel that these have been
characterised, in part, by both the Council and the Board ?throwing
topics over the fence? and, at times, these have been lacking in
strategic thought and / or thorough preparation by the Council.  Also,
the tone of the meetings has felt in the past, to me at least, to be a
little antagonistic and not in necessarily the spirit of moving a topic
or topics forward.

 

Prior to Beijing, I met with Steve Crocker and discussed with him some
of the above and part of the outcome of that discussion was a suggestion
that the Council come to the board with topics.  We did this through a
softer introduction by me and then got into the ?meat in the sandwich?
via an intervention by Jeff (I recall).  We went on to have a good
discussion on some critical issues.  The discussion was firm but
reasonable and the feedback I heard afterwards from both councillors and
board members was largely if not universally positive.

 

*Towards Durban*

 

I intend to meet with Steve again before Durban if possible, at least
through a telephone conversation.  Before doing so, I would like to be
sure we are heading in the right direction and so would appreciate your
input.

 

As chair, my feeling is that we should enter the discussion with an
objective.  What do we want to communicate and how do we want to achieve
that?

In this context, we may also think what we do not want to do / achieve
and how to make sure of that.

 

My sense of what we should try to communicate is the following:

 

1.       A dynamic and forward looking GNSO Council that is actively
seeking to undertake productive work in the interests of a successful
multi-stakeholder model.

2.       A vigilant and responsible GNSO Council with some specific and
reasonable issues / concerns that will benefit from being aired and
discussed.

 

Assuming the above, what is the purpose and substance of 1 & 2.

 

1.       Dynamic and forward looking GNSO Council ? Direct communication
of activity and taking feedback

a.       Key relationships

                                                               i.     
Within the Council & GNSO

                                                             ii.     
With ICANN staff

                                                            iii.     
With others in the ICANN ecosystem
(Actively reaching out to Board, GAC, ccNSO, other groups to participate
in joint initiatives)

b.      Operational productivity and efficiency initiatives

c.       Critical new / forward looking initiatives
(in addition to ?regular? policy work)

                                                               i.     
Development of a set of principles to guide (cross) community working groups

                                                             ii.     
Initiation of a WG to examine and develop critical issues around policy
and implementation

                                                            iii.     
Awareness of forthcoming reviews (of GNSO & GNSO Council) and
willingness to anticipate these

2.       Vigilant and responsible GNSO Council ? Able to coherently
highlight critical issues, discuss these and move the agenda forward

a.       The MS model is critical to the ?defence? of ICANN, the MS
Model needs to be upheld

b.      BB

c.       CC

 

*Summary*

 

My belief is that we have an opportunity, and should seize it, to
communicate positively and in a way which we are most likely to be
engaged with productively.

I think the issues raised and discussed in 2 above will benefit from the
context of 1 and so a structure along the lines above will work and will
welcome your feedback.

 

Please note that 2 may contain one or more topics.  I have suggested one
so far since it links to our discussion, both in Beijing and
subsequently, and could do with being moved on / developed.

 

Look forward to your feedback and input on the above.

 

 

Jonathan

 

 

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
 
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRy1HdAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqo9gH/RUQrmdiJem1DYzTo09lZMIu
o6KS79801vkjXmRRBRbljGLSARAaFW0hSDIipOL/mEnfMb6824RKJzTmuGkUR1FO
m0vNTrHRFMW2ct9CRQ7OldZwo02OCpCKxNgWgSYl1/ZgRvEp0ZSrBdMnz/cRcy4U
kR/DAO4OWQOOgDEQBOx9qR3c4aACWCTCEfOaTkPFtM77WObwuaw+fA+muQmiYKd7
EteHx1lOgBGhNq0uiynwtAP2s6vkJkymwPgoWVI/IioK7GKcVRhOh38WVmkzk50M
nOWN4GiKy2S7bjg4BvoY3Vrdnd+bgBsiA41+qqQOHFvx/Qa20B+NUt3SXTAoLzI=
=tLRh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----