[gnso-irtpc] Re: [gnso-irtpc] …. & action items

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 8 Feb 2012, at 11:01, Marika Konings wrote:

> Draft a note to the WG on the possibility of creating sub-team(s) to conduct 
> data / information gathering in relation to Charter Question B & C (Avri)

Due to some differences of opinion, I have not done so yet.  

During the meeting, I thought it was agreed that there would be two groups.  I 
have since heard that one group should be enough and that it would deplete 
people's efforts to have two such investigative efforts - this ambivalence is 
brought out in Marika's Action Item above.  I still tend toward 2 teams, a 
Question12 team and a Question 13 team because I think the questions involve 
different parts of the operations, with one being primarily as Registrar issue 
and one being primarily a Registry issue.  The other opinion states that there 
would be considerable overlap. 

There were also difference of opinion about how specific the team goals should 
be.  I opted for a relatively open format as expressed below.

So, anyway, the following is a draft of what I intended to send out.  


----
Q13 email would be the same with s/12/13/  & s/B/C/


During the IRTP-C WG meeting on 7 Feb, 2012, there was a tentative decision to 
initiate a small team to work on information gathering and documentation 
related to issues raised by Question 12 of the Stakeholder Group and 
Constituency Questionnaire.  

The small team would work in parallel to the main group's work on Charter 
Question A and would need to complete its work before the group began work on 
charter Question B, currently scheduled to begin after the San Jose meeting.  
The team would be asked to report on its status as part of the IRTP-C face to 
face meeting in San Jose.

The small teams would be open to WG members with the knowledge and skills to 
contribute to information gathering.   It is recommended that the team pick 
someone to coordinate the efforts of the group and act as the group's 
spokesperson.

---

At this point, I would ask the people in the group and suggesst that it be 
resolved on the list and at the next meeting, which I will be attending Adobe 
only.

thanks

avri