[gnso-osc-ops] Re: Forms and Voting Remedy Procedures

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Dear Rob,

Thank you the extended explanation.

There was a time when I might have agreed about the utility of forms. Recent 
experience with some forms in ICANN has made me wary of forms that are produced 
by staff and then imposed on the volunteers.

I agree that SOI/DOI should be readily findable and that it should be possible 
for a volunteer to maintain a single SOI/DOI across all WGs. I have been asking 
that something be done about this for over a year.  I do not agree that people 
should have to fill in a form.  I think it is good that form be available, but 
I also think that people should be able to upload their own file instead should 
they wish too.  I also believe that if there is a form, it should be editable 
by the volunteer, so that when conditions change they don not need to submit a 
new form.  And if there is a form, it must not be something that the Staff does 
without any oversight or community review or some analysis of it usability.

On the council voting forms, I tried to do the form you provided and I found 
confusing.  Considering I was part of the group that created these gothic 
rules, that is a warning - either we blew it with the rules, or the form was 
not useable - or maybe both.  I understand that I sometimes have a simple 
minded understanding of things, but there were parts of that form that confused 
me.  I do compliment you on the format of the output of the form, it is much 
better than some of my other recent experiences with ICANN forms.

I also believe that going into a meeting or at the start of the meeting (e.g. 
before or even during the taking of attendance), the council members or the SG 
chair, should be able inform the chair and the secretariat that a substitution 
is being made. I.e. Before the meeting, might be right before the meeting.

It seems that if not the rules, then the implementation of the rules is 
becoming something that makes the jobs of the volunteers more difficult.  And 
while it is all well and good to make the jobs of the staff easier, this cannot 
be done by processing the volunteers as if we were cattle.

a.

Ps. No need to answer my email by sending me a specific copy of the email. It 
might be a good habit to learn to trim the headers to just the list.  I don't 
know if this bit of netiquette is part of the ICANN practice for staff, but I 
recommend it.

On 11 Sep 2010, at 01:07, Robert Hoggarth wrote:

> Dear Avri and Team;
> 
> Transparency and more effective meeting process management are important
> goals of the GNSO Improvements effort and a substantial component of a
> number of the new GNSO operating Procedures (GOP). In a number of cases,
> implementing those procedures requires a balance between the need to collect
> specific information nuggets, the value of a consistent collection
> methodology and the availability (or "findability") of the information
> collected. The various forms that have been prepared to date try to maintain
> that balance. 
> 
> For example, to meet the community goal of transparency, SOI/DOIs should be
> findable on the ICANN web site both by navigation and by search. Flexibility
> of providing the information by individual working group members should be
> balanced by the need for the rest of the community to be able to find the
> various statements and disclosures without putting in a half hour of
> clicking and/or guessing. Using a simple standard form makes it possible for
> the web site database to know what data to present when an interested party
> types "Avri DOI" or “Hoggarth SOI” into the GNSO search engine.
> 
> The form doesn't have to be unduly restrictive and Staff have tried to limit
> those produced to date to only the minimum information required by the GOP.
> We need at least a name field and one or more "content" fields along with a
> way to list the groups or interests with which a community member is
> associated. What information users choose to put in those fields is up to
> them as long as it meets the requirements of the GOP, but at least the
> underlying Drupal database that the ICANN web site uses can then know where
> the name and the related content is located when called upon to display it.
> 
> In the case of the new Council abstention processes it’s more an issue of
> effective logistics and process management.  There needs to be a consistent
> notification process so that members of the Council, the affected
> Stakeholder Group, the GNSO Secretariat and the community have notice when a
> voting remedy is going to be exercised for a Council motion. There are
> substantial logistical considerations for Glen who is managing as many as 20
> different groups and, frankly, just needs to have a clear and consistent
> process to ensure that the appropriate preparations can be made ahead of
> time so that Council meetings run smoothly. A standard form not only ensures
> that the proper information is collected efficiently, but makes the entire
> process much more simple and manageable for all concerned.
> 
> Looking forward to other input on these continuing implementation
> challenges.
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/9/10 10:02 AM, "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9 Sep 2010, at 16:54, Ken Bour wrote:
>> 
>>> 2)      An online notification form is now available to permit SG/Cs to
>>> officially communicate their intention to remedy an abstention
>>> (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/council/abstention-notification-form-en.htm).
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Oh my, yet another form.
>> 
>> Will this be the required wat to do thing?
>> 
>> or will email/telephone/ hallway discussions still be acceptable ways to
>> communicate?
>> 
>> a.
>> 
>> 
>