Re: [gnso-osc-csg] FW: [gnso-osc] Global Outreach Program Recommendations - for adoption September 24

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Olga,

Yes, I saw those comments and will incorporate them.

Thanks,
Julie

________________________________
From: Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Julie Hedlund
Cc: Chuck Gomes <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
<HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; gnso-osc-csg <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tue Sep 28 12:13:16 2010
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] FW: [gnso-osc] Global Outreach Program 
Recommendations - for adoption September 24

Dear Julie,
please note that yesterday there were some additional comments sent to our list 
in relation with the document.
Best
Olga

2010/9/28 Julie Hedlund 
<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>
Dear Olga,

Thank you for the helpful clarification.  We have a call scheduled for the 
usual time on Friday.  I will send around the document with embedded comments 
and highlights tomorrow.  I am waiting tin case there are further comments from 
the OSC.

Best regards,

Julie



On 9/27/10 11:06 AM, "Olga Cavalli" 
<olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx<http://olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Thanks Julie,
What I am suggesting in relation with the document is that you only include 
questions and comments in the place that they correspond in the document.
Final changes and additions to the text will be decided during the call, dont 
worry now about that.
Also it could be useful if you can highlight those parts of the text that were 
indicated by Ron and Steve to be reviewed or commented.
Please let me know if you have any question or doubt.
Other comments are also welcome.
best regards
Olga

2010/9/27 Julie Hedlund 
<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<http://julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>
Dear Olga,

I will set up a call.   I also will try to include comments in the document, 
but it is not clear to me in every case what changes I should include.  In 
those cases where it isn’t clear to me, I’ll include the comments and we can 
discuss on the call how to, or whether to, include them.

Best regards,

Julie



On 9/26/10 6:36 PM, "Olga Cavalli" 
<olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx<http://olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx> 
<http://olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:

Thanks Chuck for your comments.
I suggest that we make a conference call next Friday at our regular time to 
work on these questions and possible answers and comments.

Julie, could you be so kind in:

1- doing the conf call arrangements.

2. Including in the body of the document all the requested comments, and 
suggested answers sent by me and other thay may contribute during this week.
I think that this will make the revision easier.

I welcome any other comments or suggestions.
Best regards
Olga

2010/9/26 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<http://cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
<http://cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
I suggest that any changes we make be presented in redline format to make it 
clear to the OSC members how we have responded to their comments.

Chuck


From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<http://owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
<http://owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>  [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Olga Cavalli

Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 2:15 PM

To: HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<http://HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
<http://HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<http://gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
<http://gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> ; 
julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<http://julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> 
<http://julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] FW: [gnso-osc] Global Outreach Program 
Recommendations - for adoption September 24


Dear Debbie,
thanks for your email, I saw Ron and Phillip questions but I was in Lithuania 
for the IGF and had no time for reacting.

Questions and comments have been already copied to our list.

Here my impressions about them and perhaps a first step to an answer:

Gender balance: About Avri´s comment related with gender balance; I fully agree 
so weI can check in the document and make the corresponding changes.

2.1.2 Membership of the Committee, 2nd paragraph notes: "The Committee 
membership should be long enough to allow the participation of host country and 
neighboring nations, and to leverage the outreach events and alert as many 
relevant parties to effectuate goals and activities."

Perhaps examples can clarify this sentence.

The INternet Governance Forum (IGF) has been organized for five years in 
different continents and countries (Athens, Rìo, Hyderabad, Sharm el Sheik, 
Vilnius, Kenya?) and after each year one representative of the hosting country 
is a member of the group that organizes the general agenda.

In the South School on Internet Governance we copied the same example, in our 
academic committee we add each year one representative of the previous hosting 
country/institution, as the school rotates among countries in the Latin 
American region.
The purpose of these inclusions is to recieve the benefits of the experience 
gatherered during the events in different places.

If you agree with this idea we could try to capture this model into a 
clarifying text.


2.1.2.1 Representation on the Committee, 4th para notes: "Committee members 
should cooperate with the ICANN Fellowship selection team to be able to invite 
up to ten key people to each ICANN event, who may include people who represent 
numerous groups, such as leaders of academia, business associations, and 
non-governmental organizations."  Again, I do not understand what the sentence 
means, particularly who is being invited where?  Some background would 
hopefully bring some clarity to the intent.


The idea behind this sentence is that the selection of the fellows in the 
"Fellowship program of ICANN" has a criteria that matches the outreach efforts 
in relation with diverse inclusion.
Today there is only one representative of each region that makes this 
selection, so it could be good if the selection of the fellows is made jointly 
with a subgroup of the commitee devoted to this activity.

Perhaps the committee should have a small steering committee and a wider and 
broader consulting group that feeds with ideas the steering committee.

Your comments are welcome, if we agree in certain points and concepts then it 
will be easier to add or change the text in the document.

Best regards
Olga


2010/9/20 <HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<http://HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
<http://HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >



Olga and Mike,
Please see the email exchange below that contains several questions about the 
Task 2 Document.

How would you like to proceed with a response?

Thanks,
Debbie

Debra Y. Hughes, Senior Counsel
American Red Cross

Office of the General Counsel
2025 E Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20006
Phone: (202) 303-5356
Fax: (202) 303-0143
HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<http://HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
<http://HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



-----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 4:43 AM
To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx<http://gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx> <http://gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Hughes, Debra Y.
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc] Global Outreach Program Recommendations - for adoption 
September 24

Hi,

I would argue in favor of the criteria for diversity.  It is important to 
realize that the perspective that diversity of gender or community brings is a 
qualification.

Perhaps in pure mathematics, this may not be the case.  But in any subject area 
that requires human perspective, qualifications are incomplete without gender 
and other perspectives.

a.



On 17 Sep 2010, at 11:29, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> Debbie,
> Ron raises some valid questions for clarification here.
> Please let us know.
> Philip
> Chair OSC
>
> From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 6:14 PM
> To: 'Philip Sheppard'; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx<http://gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx> 
> <http://gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [gnso-osc] Global Outreach Program Recommendations - for 
> adoption September 24
>
> Chair,
>
> I read the CSG Work Team's recommendations with interest and find it on the 
> whole to be a good work product.  I am particularly encouraged by the 
> considerations given to 'translations' as this is one of the pillars that 
> will support ICANN as it matures into a truly global institution.  Clearly, 
> outreach is a very important and heretofore underserved component of ICANN 
> and the initiatives noted in the recommendations are solid steps in the right 
> direction.  A lot of good ideas but, as we all know, the devil is in the 
> details and thus there is considerable work still ahead of us in this area.
>
> I have a couple of things that I wondered if the OSC might get some 
> clarification on, as follows:
>
> 2.1.2 Membership of the Committee, 2nd paragraph notes: "The Committee 
> membership should be long enough to allow the participation of host country 
> and neighboring nations, and to leverage the outreach events and alert as 
> many relevant parties to effectuate goals and activities."  I don't 
> understand this sentence.  Can we get some clarification, as well as the Work 
> Team's thinking behind the length of Committee member terms, how to manage 
> 'institutional memory' with members rotating off the committee, and so forth?
>
> 2.1.2.1 Representation on the Committee, 4th para notes: "Committee members 
> should cooperate with the ICANN Fellowship selection team to be able to 
> invite up to ten key people to each ICANN event, who may include people who 
> represent numerous groups, such as leaders of academia, business 
> associations, and non-governmental organizations."  Again, I do not 
> understand what the sentence means, particularly who is being invited where?  
> Some background would hopefully bring some clarity to the intent.
>
> My comment in regard to the first paragraph in this section (re: 
> representation) is that with such a small committee, notwithstanding ICANN's 
> principles of diversity, the committee's first priority (vis-à-vis selection 
> criteria) should be based on an individual's qualifications in the realm of 
> outreach rather than their gender or sector of the GNSO community from which 
> they come.  The second priority (which some may argue should be the first) is 
> geo location for all of the obvious reasons.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> RA
>
> Ronald N. Andruff
> President
>
> RNA Partners, Inc.
> 220 Fifth Avenue
> New York, New York 10001
> + 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11
>
> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx<http://owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx> 
> <http://owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx>  [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Philip Sheppard

> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 4:23 AM
> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx<http://gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx> <http://gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [gnso-osc] Global Outreach Program Recommendations - for adoption 
> September 24
>
> Fellow OSC members,
> please find attached the final piece of work from the various teams within 
> the OSC.
> It is a recommendation on outreach from the CSG team, chaired by Olga 
> Cavalli, in an effort led by Debbie Hughes.
> Let me have your comments with a view to OSC adoption by September 24.
>
> After which, assuming a positive reception, we will send it to the GNSO 
> Council.
>
> Philip
> OSC Chair
>
>