RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My alarm is different.  I am concerned that we spend so much time on process 
that it seriously detracts from meeting our objectives.  The real test of our 
success will not be how perfect our processes were but the recommendations we 
produce so I think we should be spending much more time in that direction.  I 
suggest we get to work on what counts.
 
Also, I don't think I understand Victoria's suggestion that "the enumerated 
points from the BGC Report which are minimums for our work". Our mission is 
specifically to develop implementation plans for the recommendations in the BGC 
report, nothing more, nothing less.  If all that is meant is that we need to 
look at the full report and not just the enumerated points in our work plan, 
that is fine. I would just like to clarification on that.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 5:29 AM
        To: sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; 
Gomes, Chuck
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; Olga Cavalli
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        
        

         

        I'm sure SS is quite right and I apologize for being the one raising 
these issues. 

         

        Many of my concerns are addressed by the fact we now have transcripts 
-which I find very helpful. 

         

        I think this means that in future we don't need to paraphrase exchanges 
in a blow by blow fashion and can revert to a more traditional minute format. 

         

        Substantively in relation to our last meeting on 24 April, given the 
format used, I don't think the key points of our exchanges on the following 
have come through; (1) on not being locked down to the work plan and the plan 
having only the enumerated points from the BGC Report which are minimums for 
our work and to put it aside for now and not be limited by it (transcript pages 
22-26); and (2) the exercise the board is undertaking etc (transcript pages 
42-26).  

         

        In relation to the meeting minutes of 10 April, I'd like to make one 
point which I think is important and that I would like to see in the minutes, 
and that was our agreement that the work plan be a live document (transcript 
page 27).  

         

        I don't wish to cause any more work for Julie or anyone else and am 
happy to make these points at the beginning of our next meeting so they are 
included in those minutes and do not take up any further time-if agreeable.  

         

        Best regards, 

         

        Victoria McEvedy

        Principal 

        McEvedys

        Solicitors and Attorneys 

         

         

        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: SS Kshatriy [mailto:sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: 29 April 2009 05:11
        To: Glen de Saint Géry; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; Gomes, Chuck
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; Olga Cavalli; Victoria McEvedy
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team

         

Dear All,

Subject-- Transcrip vs Meeting Minutes

1. I am quite sure that transcripts are of very poor quality. Atleast, what I 
said is not there.
2. It is beyond my comprehension why is there so much resistance for producing 
Meeting Minutes? 

'Minutes of Meeting' is very basic and essential item. It is an important 
record. General practice is that the first thing done in the next meeting is 
review of previous minutes.

Transcript/MP3 can be useful only in case of any controversy.

3. We are spending too much time and effort on unproductive issues.

regards,

SS 


--- On Tue, 4/28/09, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

        From: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        To: "Glen de Saint Géry" <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
        Cc: "OSC-CSG Work Team" <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>, "Olga Cavalli" 
<olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Victoria McEvedy" <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>
        Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 3:39 PM

        Thanks Glen.  It seems to me that the transcripts are quite a useful 
resource that do not require much effort.  Does it make sense to try using them 
instead of minutes for awhile as a test?  If so, we might want to still have an 
action item list.
        
        Chuck
        
        
        Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)
        
         -----Original Message-----
        From:   Glen de Saint Géry [mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx]
        Sent:   Tuesday, April 28, 2009 06:19 PM Eastern Standard Time
        To:     jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
        Cc:     OSC-CSG Work Team; Gomes, Chuck; Olga Cavalli; Victoria McEvedy
        Subject:        RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: 
OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team
        
        Dear All,
        
        Little editing is needed for the body of the transcripts. A header, 
attendance sheet , and  correcting names is added. I must get them out quickly 
and that part is also getting fixed! Sorry for the delays!
        
        Glen
        
        From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx]
        Sent: mardi 28 avril 2009 22:09
        To: Glen de Saint Géry
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; Gomes, Chuck; Olga Cavalli; Victoria McEvedy
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        
        Dear Glen,
        
        Perhaps you could help us with a question: How much editing is required 
before meeting transcripts can be posted and how long does this editing process 
generally take?
        
        Thanks so much for your help.
        
        Best regards,
        
        Julie
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
        Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:39 PM
        To: jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; Olga Cavalli; Victoria McEvedy; Glen de 
Saint Géry
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        Thanks Julie.  I only looked briefly at the first transcript but the 
quality looked fine to me.  I will help of course if we alway identify 
ourselves when we talk.
        
        Key question for me: how much edititing needed to be done before 
posting this?
        
        Chuck
        
        ________________________________
        From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx]
        Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:30 PM
        To: Olga Cavalli; Victoria McEvedy; Gomes, Chuck; Glen de Saint Géry
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        Dear Olga, Victoria, and Chuck,
        
        I see that the transcripts now are online.  These are being produced 
for all of the teams so they will be available whether we decide to use them or 
not.  I will await guidance from the Work Team as to whether they are of 
sufficient quality to be useful by themselves, or whether they should be 
supplemented with meeting notes/minutes.  In addition, perhaps Glen can advise 
us on how quickly they can be made available after a meeting.
        
        Here are the links and I also will add them to the wiki.
        
        Best regards,
        
        Julie
        
        Julie Hedlund
        Policy Consultant
        
        OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team Meeting Transcripts:
        
        27 March 2009: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/transcript-ops-27mar09.pdf
        10 April 2009: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/transcript-csg-20apr09.pdf
        24 April 2009: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/transcript-csg-24apr09.pdf
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From: olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of 
Olga Cavalli
        Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:09 PM
        To: Gomes, Chuck
        Cc: Victoria McEvedy; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx; OSC-CSG Work Team
        Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        Thanks Chuck,
        I agree that we must check the quality of transcrips before considering 
them valid.
        We agreed during our kickoff meeting in Mexico to produce meeting 
minutes, that should be reviewed by the working group and posted into our wiki.
        Regards
        Olga
        
        2009/4/28 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
        Unless things have changed recently, the work to distribute reasonable 
quality transcripts may not justify the value.  If the transcripts produced by 
the teleconference service were of reasonable quality and immediately usable, 
that would be good.  In the past though, my understanding is that they needed 
significant editing before they were effectively usable.  We need Glen to tell 
us how much editing work is required to prepare transcripts for distribution so 
that we can determine whether the value justifies the effort.
        
        I have no problem with them being posted so that we can decide for 
ourselves how much value they add, but I just suggest that we don't expect too 
much.  Transcripts of audio teleconference meetings should not be assumed to be 
the same as the live transcripts produced at ICANN regional meetings.
        
        Chuck
        
        ________________________________
        From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Victoria McEvedy
        Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 2:21 PM
        To: Olga Cavalli; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>
        
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        
        Julie thank you.
        
        
        
        As to general approach, to avoid paraphrasing, if we are going to have 
transcripts as well as recordings -we can in future perhaps forgo this and 
simply refer to the transcripts for minutes?
        
        
        
        I don't know what others views are.
        
        
        
        Perhaps instead then at the end of our calls we can agree our action 
items/deliverables/decisions made -and leave people to find the reasoning in 
the transcripts?
        
        
        
        In relation to the summary of our last two calls, I'd like to defer to 
the transcript on a couple of points so will wait until we have them available.
        
        
        
        Thank you and best,
        
        
        
        Victoria McEvedy
        
        Principal
        
        McEvedys
        
        Solicitors and Attorneys
        
        [cid:image001.jpg@01C9C860.2A18E520]
        
        
        
        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> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
        Sent: 28 April 2009 18:15
        To: jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team
        Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] 24 April Meeting Notes: OSC-Constituency 
Operations Work Team
        
        
        
        Thanks Julie,
        very helpful.
        Regards
        Olga
        
        2009/4/27 Julie Hedlund 
<jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
        
        Dear Work Team Members,
        
        
        
        The draft notes summarizing our discussion at our 24 April 2009 meeting 
are posted at 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operation_work_team_meeting_notes
 and are linked from the main wiki page at 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.  I 
welcome your comments and suggested changes.
        
        
        
        Also, Glen de Saint Géry, the GNSO Secretariat, has informed me that 
she will be posting transcripts of all Work Team meetings on the GNSO Calendar 
site at: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#april.  As those for our team become 
available, I will link to them from our meeting notes.
        
        
        
        In addition, the MP3 recordings for each meeting are linked to the 
meeting notes.  If you scroll down the notes page you will see, listed in 
succession, the meeting notes for all of the meetings to date along with their 
MP3 recordings.
        
        
        
        Best regards,
        
        
        
        Julie
        
        
        
        Julie Hedlund
        
        Policy Consultant