Dear Stephanie
Thank you Stephanie for a very important question.
My answer would be that we should try to use the meeting to improve our understanding and relationship to other stakeholders. As part of the new empowered community, it will not be any longer good enough to work out compromises between stakeholders that everybody is equally unhappy with, but we need to learn to move from talk and be able to work and act together. This will require a better understanding of each others needs and ability and the identification and implementation of real win-win situations. That goes further then just stating positions, it means to learn to listen too. NPOC tried to organize a session in Hyderabad where we would be able to listen to the perceptions and expectations of other stakeholder groups of the Civil society stakeholders. The event did not take place because of massive scheduling conflicts, but we might try to do something similar again in Reykjavik.
Hope that helps and Thanks again for your thoughtful and well placed question.
Yours
Klaus
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Great idea guys, what did you have in mind for the agenda?
Stephanie
On 2016-12-01 06:41, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">+1 Klaus
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
+506 8837 7176
Skype: carlos.raulg
Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
On 1 Dec 2016, at 2:00, Klaus Stoll wrote:Dear All
I wish we would spend as much time and energy on IG policy making topics as we spend time on the merits of various places around the world to host an ICANN Intersessional meeting. Can we talk about what we need to discuss t the meeting, the goals we want to achieve and how to get there. When we do this, the place might not be of such an importance.
Yours
Klaus
PS: Kuawi, Hawaii. Definitely!
On 12/1/2016 1:37 AM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Sam,
I don't think it was clear at all that some locations were said "almost in jest". What was made clear, however, on page 14 of the transcript, was the instruction to, "Please type [locations] into the chat. No tongue in cheek suggestions, please, because we can’t see or hear your tone when you're typing that in." If that instruction was ignored and our representatives on the call did instead suggest cities not well suited to hosting a meeting such as this one, I'm not sure who they thought they were serving.
Ayden Férdeline
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: NCPH Intersessional timing
Local Time: 1 December 2016 12:24 AM
UTC Time: 1 December 2016 00:24
In response to who made the suggestions for a location for the CGPH
Intersession, a review of the session Chat transcript
makes it clear that the names were tossed out at the last minute, and
some serious and some almost in jest.
One gets a sense from the overall records of the meeting, that Reykjavik
remains a front runner.
The decision is supposed to be out on Friday, Dec 2nd.
Sam L.