RE: [gnso-idn-wg] Your opinion regarding changing our call schedule

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <mxr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Will, status quo is good.  2-hr. calls at 6a.m. would not
be good.  Thanks.

Mike Rodenbaugh

Sr. Legal Director

Yahoo! Inc.

 

NOTICE:  This communication is confidential and may be protected by
attorney-client and/or work product privilege.  If you are not the
intended recipient, please notify me by reply, and delete this
communication and any attachments.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Will Rodger
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:42 PM
To: rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-idn-wg] Your opinion regarding changing our call
schedule

Ram Mohan wrote:
> Several WG members suggest that we should collapse the paired calls
into a
> single call each week so we can all focus with intensity on our
discussion
> rather than attempting to reconcile discussion between the two calls.
>
> The original reason for the paired calls was to achieve momentum on
our
> task.  I believe that we have achieved that goal.  I am open to
collapsing
> the paired calls into a single call each week, with an alternating
time
> schedule so that different parts of the world are inconvenienced each
week.
>
> Please write in to the list your preference:
> 1) Single weekly call, alternating between earlier & late time slots
each
> week, each call now extending for 120 minutes (2 hours)
> 2) Status quo (paired calls, each 90 minutes)
>   

Status quo. Group dynamics are such that a "two hour" call could easily 
bog down. To be frank, 90 min. is painful enough on a conference call.

Will