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

[SS Kshatriy <sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Olga,
thanks for mail.
For the timebeing, I will make following points on Agend and Draft work plan.
Agenda--It appears to be highly loaded. I will prefer a thorough and indepth 
work than 'more amount of work'. For example, instead of vote on charter, it 
should be discussion. However, if majority of the members vouch that they have 
gone through the charter deligently and find no need for discussion and 
changes, it is ok to vote.
 
Draft Work Plan--
The Terms Constituency, Stake Holdre Group, Constituents need to be defined 
properly. It looks confusing at times.
Ref to to Action Items/Deliverables item 1a, a list of Procedures 'presently' 
followed by various Stake Holder Groups.
best regards,
SS 

--- On Wed, 4/8/09, Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Next Steps Constituency Operations Team
To: sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx, "Julie Hedlund" <jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Rob 
Hoggarth" <robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>, "Michael Young" <myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 2:15 PM


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 archives2) public postings of 
constituency budgets3) 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. QuestionnaireIn 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 
throughConstituency 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