Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Next Steps Constituency Operations Team

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear SS,
thanks for your detailed and valuable comments.
I will review them for our next conference call.
Please review the draft working plan and the agenda proposed for the next
conference call, and let us know if you think we should make changes to it
in order to include new items.
Best regards
Olga

2009/4/8 SS Kshatriy <sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx>

>  Dear Olga and The Team,
>
> This refers to your mail of April 06 and item:
>
>
>
> 2.         Review background information regarding existing GNSO
> constituencies.
>
>
>
>  I have gone through the material circulated by Rob in his mail of March
> 27 and will refer particularly to two links from the mail, ie,
>
>
>
> 1. GNSO Improvements Information Page – Constituency Renewal Process
>  http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/renewal-process-en.htm
>
> 2. ICANN Public Comment Forum – GNSO Constituency Renewals 2009
> http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gnso-constituency-renewals
>
> --
>
> I will particularly draw Team’s attention to Rob’s Summary—Analysis of
> Public Comments …
>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-constituency-renewals/msg00005.html
>
> and particularly last two sections:
>
> *III.             **SUMMARY & ANALYSIS *and* IV.  NEXT STEPS*
>
> * *
>
> Rob has very ably summarized and analyzed public comments.
>
> --
>
> *My Observations:*
>
> 1. There are only 5 comments by 4 persons, one person gives additional
> comments. One of the 4 supplements other person’s comments and adds his own.
>
> Public Comments are too few.
>
>
>
> 2.  For maximizing transparency, George Kirikos, in his public comments,
> lays down three criterion:
>
> 1) public mailing list archives
>
> 2) public postings of constituency budgets
>
> 3) public list of all members of a constituency.
>
> I suggest that Team debates on this and lays down clear cut criterion for 
> Transparency.
>
>  3. While summarizing the comments, Rob says,
>
> Most of the comments were quite *blunt* and generally expressed
> significant skepticism regarding the ultimate value and results of the
> re-confirmation process.
>
> I will say that the comments are *serious *and in some ways* damaging *to the 
> concerned parties*. *The Team should take these comments seriously while 
> analyzing the submissions from ‘particular’ Constituencies.
>
>
>  4. From the section *IV.  NEXT STEPS, *I understand that either some more 
> relevant document/reports are available or being prepared.
>
> These documents are important for the Team to carry out its work and should 
> be made available to it.
>
> 5. *Questionnaire*
>
> In the last meeting, a need for questionnaire was discussed. It is reported 
> in the minutes as:
>
>
>    - S.S.Kshatriya suggested that the team could develop questionnaires to
>    send to constituencies and use the information gathered to develop
>    guidelines.
>    - Rob said that the ICANN staff had sent out a questionnaire to
>    constituencies at the end of 2008 and promised to circulate the results to
>    the team.
>
> I have gone through
>
> Constituency Survey Report - 
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/gnso-constituency-survey-report-28jan09-en.pdf
>
> Send by Rob. It is the questionnaire Staff had sent to members of the
> Constituencies. Members had free will to respond or not to. It is apparent
> that response was limited.
>
>
>
> What is needed is that The Team develops a set of questionnaires for the
> purpose of knowing if the Constituencies have followed ICANN/GNSO’s
> directives or not and how much. These are to be sent to Constituencies’
> Officers/Staff and it will be mandatory for them to respond.
>
>
>
> 6. *THE TEAM to have all INFORMATION for EFFECTIVE CONTRIBUTION*
>
> For any Committee or Board to take decision, relevant connected papers are
> necessary. I have a feeling that our Team lacks that facility. For example,
> the links sent by Rob should have been available in the beginning itself.
> The documents referred by me in 4 above are also important. Also, only those
> Documents are made available those are required in a particular meeting and
> the Team is not burdened (and gets confused) with irrelevant information.
>
>
>
> My suggestion will be that Chair and Vice Chair should sit down with the
> Staff and to workout proper strategy/procedure.
>
>
>
> 7. *Public Comments*
>
> I am aware that this suggestion is not relevant to this Forum (Team). Just
> in case Staff or any other Body wants to benefit from it:
>
>
>
> I have observed that Process of ‘Public Comments’ has several flaws. I will
> be prepared to give my suggestions/observations if needed.
>
>
>
> best,
>
>
>
> S S Kshatriya (SS)
>
> sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx
>
> --- On *Mon, 4/6/09, Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>
> From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] Next Steps Constituency Operations Team
> To: gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: "Olga Cavalli" <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>, "Julie Hedlund" <
> jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Rob Hoggarth" <robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>,
> "Michael Young" <myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Monday, April 6, 2009, 12:47 PM
>
>
>  Dear Work Team Members,
>
> I hope this email finds you well.
>
> In preparation to our next conference call to be held next Friday, April
> 10th 13 GMT, we would appreciate if you can review the following information
> and documents.
>
>
> *1. Action Items:*
>
>
> **
> Here are the action items agreed to at the 27 March 2009 meeting.  These
> also are posted on the wiki main page at:
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.
>
> I have also icluded who is responsible for each of the action items:
>
> 1.      Review the revised charter and provide comments or edits: Team
>
> 2.      Review background information regarding existing GNSO
> constituencies: Team
>
> 3.      ICANN staff to assist in reaching out to new constituencies to see
> if they want to send representatives to work with the team:Staff
>
> 4.      Vote on the revised charter including the priority of tasks and
> implementation plan at the meeting on April 10: Team
>
> 5.      Develop draft work plan for the subtasks of the “enhancing
> constituencies” task: Chair, Vice chair and Staff
>
> 6.   Chair and Vice-Chair provide biweekly reports to the OSC:chair and
> vice chair
>
>
> *2.  Meeting Notes:*
>
> *
> *
>
> The meeting notes for the 01 April 2009 meeting are posted on the wiki at:
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operations_team_meeting_notes
>  . Please let me know if you have any changes to suggest or questions.
>
>
> In addition, Julie has helped us making the following changes to the wiki.
> I welcome your suggestions for further improvements:
>
> *3.  Wiki Changes:
>
> *
> *Charter:
>
> *
> a.  Created a link to the draft charter new Wiki page at the top of the
> Work Team's main Wiki page.
> b.  Deleted the Charter text from the Work Team's main page and moved it
> to the new Charter Wiki page.
> c.  Moved the deleted text in Section VI to the bottom of the section so
> that the revised priority items are listed first.
>
> *Work Team Board Recommendation Draft Checklist (priority items):
>
> *
> a.  Created a link to the draft Board recommendation checklist new Wiki
> page at the top of the Work Team's main Wiki page.
> b. Created a link to the draft Board recommendation checklist new Wiki
> page at the top of the new Charter Wiki page (and in the reference to
> priorities)
>
>
> We are developing the work plan, that will be submitted hopefuly today for
> your comments and revision.
>
> Please let us know if you have any doubt or comment and please review the
> information included in this message.
>
> Best regards
>
> Olga Cavalli
>
>
>