Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Action Items: OSC-CSG Work Team 24 April 2009 Meeting

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
Dear Veronica, could you please clarfy to me your last message?
I do not understand it.
Best regards and thanks in advance
Olga

2009/4/24 Victoria McEvedy <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>

>  Without being pedantic is having a main points of discussion section as
> we have below a usual practice? There is a danger these summaries will stand
> in for Minutes without being minutes and I understand the full recording is
> posted online? I think we would all like to avoid editing/agreeing this sort
> of thing but I don’t agree with the scope/characterization of some of the
> wording—but is it important? Apologies in advance.
>
>
>
>
>
> Victoria McEvedy
>
> Principal
>
> McEvedys
>
> *Solicitors** and Attorneys *
>
> [image: cid:669FC637-760A-4D2F-B56E-2C180C1870CC]
>
>
>
> 96 Westbourne Park Road
>
> London
>
> W2 5PL
>
>
>
> T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
>
> F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
>
> M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169
>
> * *
>
> *www.mcevedy.eu  ***
>
> Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
>
> This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the
> exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also
> be legally privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us
> know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without
> reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
>
> This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer
> is created by this email communication.
>
>
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Julie Hedlund
> *Sent:* 24 April 2009 17:41
> *To:* OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* [gnso-osc-csg] Action Items: OSC-CSG Work Team 24 April 2009
> Meeting
>
>
>
> Dear Work Team Members,
>
>
>
> For your review and consideration, the following are suggested action items
> and main points of discussion from today's meeting.  I welcome your
> questions and comments.  These also are posted on the wiki at:
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.
> Also, please note that *the* *next meeting will be held on Friday, May 8
> at 1300 UTC.*
>
>
>
> *Meeting Action Items:*
>
> 1.  Draft Task 1 Work Plan:
>
> -- Julie will review constituency and stakeholder group charters and
> indicate which contain the criteria listed in subtasks 1, 2, and 3 of the
> Task 1 Work Plan.
>
> -- Work Team members will use the table to determine possible areas of
> concern/conflict as recommendations are developed for each of the Task 1
> subtasks.
>
> 2.  Board resolution on Constituency Renewal Process -- Rob Hoggarth will
> provide information pertaining to the Board resolution on the Constituency
> Renewal Process.
>
>
>
> *Main Points of Discussion:*
>
> 1.  Staff support
>
> -- Discussed procedures for requesting support and the need to coordinate
> requests to ensure all Work Team needs are addressed.
>
> -- Emphasized the commitment by staff to support the Work Team as described
> in the Charter: *"*V. STAFF SUPPORT The ICANN Staff assigned to the work
> team will fully support the work of the teams as directed by the Chair
> including meeting support, document drafting, editing and distribution and
> other substantive contributions when appropriate."
>
> -- Staff suggested an action item, to which the team agreed, to produce
> preliminary information to address subtasks 1, 2, and 3 as described above.
>
>
>
> 2.  Text of Task 1 Work Plan
>
> -- Agreed to the following textual change for Task 1, subtask 1, items 1
> and 2: "1. Develop guidelines, rules, or principles for constituency
> participation in stakeholder groups." and "2. Develop guidelines, rules, or
> principles for participation in constituencies.
>
> -- Agreed to being flexible in the implementation of the Work Plan subtasks
> and not to be tied to semantics.
>
>
>
> 3.  Clarification on the Timing of Board Approvals of Constituency Charters
> and Possible Conflicts with Work Team Recommendations
>
> -- Concerns were raised concerning possible conflicts with existing
> constituency/stakeholder charters arising from the Work Team's
> recommendations.
>
> -- Work Team members agreed to identify specific areas of concern within
> their subtasks, aided by a table prepared by Julie Hedlund.  (See Action
> Item 1 above.)
>
> -- Concerns also were raised respecting possible conflicts/duplication with
> the ongoing Constituency Renewal Process.  Rob Hoggarth agreed to provide
> information on the Board resolution/process.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> Julie Hedlund
>
> Policy Consultant
>