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

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Victoria,

We agreed during our Kick-off meeting in México that Julie was going to
prepare minutes of our meetings, which are available for working team
revision.

Previous meeting notes are posted on the wiki:

https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operation_work_team_meeting_notes

If you think that the text sent by Julie must be changed to make it more
accurate, please send new suggested text to the list. Once agreed this text
can be used as the base document for the meeting minutes and for the OSC
report.

I hope I have captured your concerns, if you have further comments or
suggestions do not hesitate to let me know.

Best regards

Olga




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

>  Sorry for not being clear Olga.
>
>
>
> I’m really saying I’d like to amend the action points if we are to be held
> to them—they don’t quite capture some agreed points and they are not
> accurate as Minutes.
>
>
>
> I’m also asking where are our formal minutes?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> 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:* olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of
> *Olga Cavalli
> *Sent:* 24 April 2009 22:18
> *To:* Victoria McEvedy
> *Cc:* jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Action Items: OSC-CSG Work Team 24 April
> 2009
>
>
>
> Dear Victoria,
> I just changed you name for Veronica in my last email, my apologies!
> Have a nice weekend!
> Regards
> Olga
>
> 2009/4/24 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
>
>
>
>
>