Re: [board-09georegionswg] Geo Regions Review WG - 25 May Meeting Report

["Fahd A. Batayneh" <fahd.batayneh@xxxxxxxxx>]

Greetings All,

I have no objections to what was discussed during the meeting and what was
summarized in the e-mail below.

Cheers,

-- FAB
Sent from Amman, Jordan


On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Robert Hoggarth
<robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  Dear Working Group Members:
>
> Set forth below are the matters and recommendations agreed to on today’s WG
> call. Note that the WG attendees would like feedback ASAP from fellow WG
> members on these matters – particularly any objections to the
> recommendations.
>
> *WG Attendees:
> *
> David Archbold
> Cheryl Langdon-Orr
> Fahd Batayneh
>
> Staff Attendees:
>
> Bart Boswinkel
> Pablo Hinojosa
> Rob Hoggarth
> Glen de Saint Gery
>
> Apologies:
>
> Janis Karklins
> Paul Wilson
>
> *Overview:
> *
> The attending WG members discussed a wide range of issues and ideas.  The
> made a number of recommendation summarized below.  Please review them as
> soon as possible to note any concerns or objections.
>
> *Survey Feedback:
> *
> To date there have been 28 responses to the survey document.  WG members on
> the call expressed disappointment with the level of response to date and
> briefly discussed whether the reason was lack of community interest or
> understanding of the issues.  Given the discussions about the preparation of
> the Interim Report, WG members on the call left open the possibility of
> keeping the survey open longer. Please continue to encourage members of your
> specific communities to take a few minutes to take the survey – see -
> https://www.bigpulse.com/p9044/.   Rob will report the number of
> respondents as of June 1 so that WG members can consider whether to extend
> the time the survey should remain open.
>
> *Interim Report Next Steps
>
> *WG members on the call acknowledged that the draft Interim Report
> requires much more substantive input from WG members and that the time
> necessary to complete that effort would likely not meet the present
> deadlines created by the WG.  They further agreed that additional community
> perspective would be helpful in developing the report.  It was recommended
> that the current draft version (dav4RHv4) be cleaned up to remove references
> to individual WG members and that the WG post the draft report for community
> comment and discussion in Brussels.
>
> Now that the WG is contemplating some community discussions in Brussels
> that would include possible feedback on the draft document (you’ll see below
> the recommendations for a 1 1/2 hour workshop on Thursday morning in
> Brussels), it is necessary to circulate the document to the community by 31
> May. You may recall that the ICANN Board’s Public Participation Committee
> requires that any documents to be discussed at an ICANN meeting be
> circulated three weeks before the start (opening session) of the meeting.
>  The recommended modification to the Interim Report timetable will give all
> WG members more time for community interaction and thoughts about the
> document and allow a more complete and substantive document to be produced
> after the Brussels meeting.
>
> Unless there are any immediate objections to this recommended approach, Rob
> will clean up the present draft into a version “dav5RHv5” to circulate to
> you tomorrow and then subsequently to the ICANN web team for posting on the
> main ICANN site and on the Working Group Wiki -
> https://st.icann.org/geo-review-wg/index.cgi?geographic_regions_review_working_group_wggr_wiki-
>  by the end of this week.
>
> Rob will also ensure that the Board is informed of this timetable
> adjustment at its Brussels meeting.
>
> *Brussels Plans:
> *
> WG members agreed to schedule a session/workshop on Thursday (24 June)
> morning in Brussels.  Dave (in his Chairman’s capacity) will start the
> session with an overview of the geographic regions framework and the
> remainder of the meeting will be an active dialogue between any WG members
> who can attend and the community discussing the potential future
> applications of the Geo Regions framework.  WG members on the call agreed
> that this session (which will be recorded and transcribed) could help flesh
> out community views about potential future options for the geographic
> regions framework and spur further substantive thoughts by WG members for
> preparation of the Interim Report.  Given the tight schedules of WG members
> in Brussels, tentatively, the workshop session will substitute for an
> in-person meeting of the working group.
>
> *Timetable:
> *
> Assuming no objections to the above recommendations by attending WG
> members, the remaining dates now on the WG calendar leading up to Brussels
> are:
>
>
>    - 26 May:  Cleaned-Up Draft v5 of Interim Report circulated to WG
>    members
>    - 28 May:  Draft v5 of Interim Report forwarded to ICANN Web Team for
>    posting
>    - 1 June:  WG Survey Closes (could be extended)
>    - 15 June – 1200 UTC:  Scheduled WG Call - Finalize Agenda For Brussels
>    session/workshop)
>    - 24 June - Brussels Meeting:  WG Session/Workshop for community (8-930
>    AM Local time)
>
>
> *Next WG Call:
> *
> Consistent with the agreed upon every-three-week timetable, the next call
> of the Working Group is scheduled for next Tuesday, 15 June at 1200 UTC.  At
> that meeting the WG will finalize plans for its 24 June session/workshop in
> Brussels.
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Rob Hoggarth
>