AW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI activity

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Ron.
What do others think about an F2F meeting in CR? This seems to be relatively 
difficult to manage since we're already close to the CR meeting. The only 
timeslot I could see would be on Saturday morning before 10:00 a.m. But this 
should be confirmed by Glen - in case more people opt for this.


Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich

________________________________
Von: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Februar 2012 16:40
An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI activity

Thanks for bringing some focus to the SCI, Wolf-Ulrich.  I support the idea of 
sending out a reminder to let everyone know that the SCI exists to support fine 
tuning of processes.  I also support a f-2-f meeting in Costa Rica to discuss 
the other items you note below.

Kind regards,

RA

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.


________________________________
From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 6:48 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI activity

Dear SCI members,

after a phase of silent months it's now the right moment to put some items to 
the table which need input and recommendations from this committee.

1.    Rules of procedure 
(http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-16dec11-en.pdf)
The GNSO council had a successful first run trial re a consent agenda which 
should be put in a formal process. One rugh suggestion for this is as follows:

1. The Chair or meeting leader calls for any opposition to said item being in 
the consent agenda. If any opposition is voiced, then that item is dropped from 
the consent agenda (and can be re-introduced at any time in the main agenda).

2. If no opposition is voiced to the item being on the consent agenda, the 
Chair or meeting leader calls for any opposition to the item itself. If any 
opposition is voiced, then no action is taken (and the item can be 
re-introduced at any time in the main agenda).

3. If no opposition, the consent agenda item is deemed approved by theGNSO 
Council.

Obviously we need to discuss this in more detail, e.g. the goal of a consent 
agenda, which items could be included to a consent agenda and which should 
definitely be excluded e.a. It seems to make sense to include the text - once 
recommended - into chapter 3.0 of the rules "GNSO Council Meetings".

2.    As discussed in Dakar, it might be worth sending out a reminder to the 
GNSO Council and SG/C leaders regarding the mandate of the SCI and the 
opportunity that exists to request review of GNSO Improvement related items. To 
this end, thanks to Marika the attached draft letter has been prepared for your 
consideration. Please feel free to comment.

3.    Furthermore, in order to obtain feedback from WGs/DT on their experience 
with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines - as it is intended in the SCI charter - 
, it might be useful to develop a short survey which could facilitate data 
gathering and input. In order to kick off the discussion here are some bullet 
points:
*  The objective of the survey would be to determine whether there are any 
issues that were encountered by WG/Dts with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, 
and/or identify areas for improvement
*  If deemed effective, such a survey could become a standard part of the 
self-evaluation process of WGs and provide the SCI with regular input on the 
status of the GNSO Working Group Guidelines

Ideas for items to be included in the survey are welcome!


I appreciate very much your response and hope to see most of you in Costa Rica.

Kind regards

Wolf-Ulrich Knoben