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

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

I'll also follow up internally to see if there is any further information 
available with regard to the procedures the Board uses for its consent agenda.

With regard to meeting in Costa Rica, usually there are also some rooms 
available which staff can sign up for on the spot. It should be noted that such 
rooms are available on a first come, first serve basis and no additional 
services are provided (recording, Adobe Connect, etc.). If there is a preferred 
time / day for an informal meeting of the SCI, I'm happy to check whether a 
room would be available. However, I would only be able to confirm this upon 
arrival in Costa Rica. Should we set up a doodle poll to confirm the best time 
/ day for such an informal meeting, which would also include the time/date 
suggested by Wolf?

With best regards,

Marika

From: "KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>" 
<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:54:43 -0800
To: "Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
"gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>>, 
"randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: AW: AW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI activity

Mary,

thanks for your thoughts.

to 1: I think there must be a history "on Board" where it comes from and how 
they deal with it. No problem to ask board members how it happened,

to 2: I'm still expecting more comments and shall follow-up then

to 3: we've to find a "quiet corner", and I'll try to manage this


Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich

________________________________
Von: Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Februar 2012 19:34
An: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>; 
randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich
Betreff: Re: AW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI activity

Yes, thanks, Wolf-Ulrich, for marshaling us and summarizing the various 
activities we should be undertaking. On the 3 specific items you mention, here 
is my initial (brief) reaction/feedback:

- Consent agenda: I'd like to know more about what goes into the ICANN Board's 
thinking behind items to include (or not); and if possible, what generally 
(outside ICANN-land) that sort of thing means and how it's done, e.g. at major 
non-profit orgs. Is there a way to find this out? I hesitate to load it on to 
ICANN staff but perhaps if others think it useful there could be a brief 
enquiry to Diane Schroeder as well as to reps of bigger non-profits? I agree it 
should form part of the GNSO rules once the process is finalized.

- Reminder letter: I support this idea as well.

- Survey: I support this idea; a question that occurs to me is what the best 
timing would be, e.g. should we let a bit more time elapse before doing it, or 
after another couple of WGs under the process have completed their work?

Happy to meet F2F in Costa Rica if an appropriate time can be found. As Ron 
says, it needn't be long or formal.

Cheers, and safe travels to all,
Mary


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: 
http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>>>
From:   <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>>
To:     <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
<gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date:   2/23/2012 12:16 PM
Subject:        AW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI activity
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<mailto: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>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 6:48 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto: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