Re: [gnso-otf-dt] Re: Revised Outreach Task Force Draft Charter

["Anthony Harris" <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Re: [gnso-otf-dt] Re: Revised Outreach Task Force Draft CharterJulie,

I am OK with what you propose.

Regards

Tony Harris
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dykes, Roy 
  To: 'Julie Hedlund' ; Olga Cavalli 
  Cc: gnso-otf-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 10:19 AM
  Subject: RE: [gnso-otf-dt] Re: Revised Outreach Task Force Draft Charter


  Julie,

   

  I'm fine with that approach.

   

  Thanks,

  --Roy

   

   

  From: owner-gnso-otf-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-otf-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
  Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 9:17 AM
  To: Olga Cavalli
  Cc: gnso-otf-dt@xxxxxxxxx
  Subject: Re: [gnso-otf-dt] Re: Revised Outreach Task Force Draft Charter

   

  Dear Olga,

  I will send a revised redlined document with Chuck's changes today.   If 
there are no objections to the revised draft from DT members then I will 
prepare a motion with the document for submission to the Council tomorrow.

  Best regards,

  Julie


  On 10/15/11 11:00 AM, "Olga Cavalli" <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

  Hi Julie,
  which is your suggestion on how to proceed?
  I am really very interested in doing the motion on Tuesday, we have been 
working on this document for almost a year so far.
  looking forward for your comments.
  Best
  Olga

  2011/10/14 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>

  Dear Chuck,

  Thank you for your quick response and again very helpful comments.   If the 
DT members have any questions or concerns I will relay them.  Otherwise you can 
assume we will make the changes you suggest.  We will forward a final version 
for your reference.

  Have a nice weekend!

  Julie


  On 10/14/11 7:25 PM, "Chuck Gomes" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
<http://cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:

  Thanks Julie and the entire team. Please see below.
   
  Chuck
   

  From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx] 
  Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 4:45 PM
  To: Gomes, Chuck
  Cc: gnso-otf-dt@xxxxxxxxx <http://gnso-otf-dt@xxxxxxxxx> 
  Subject: Revised Outreach Task Force Draft Charter

  Dear Chuck,

  On behalf of Olga Cavalli and the Outreach Task Force Drafting Team (OTF-DT), 
I want to thank you for your thoughtful and extremely helpful comments on the 
OTF Draft Charter.  Attached is a redlined document incorporating the changes 
we made to address your comments.  Here also is a brief description of what we 
did in each case:

    1.. General Comment:  The OTF-DT members agreed with your suggestion 
concerning the need to include tactics but thought that the words 
"Implementation Plan" more clearly captured the intent.  A global change was 
made to include "Implementation Plan" with each occurrence of the word 
"Strategy." [Gomes, Chuck] Excellent change. 
    2.. Scope:  We tried to make the language more clear and to emphasize the 
need for efficiency and cost-effectiveness. [Gomes, Chuck] I think you covered 
this pretty well. 
    3.. Deliverables:  Here and elsewhere we included a step for a budget 
request to be made according to the ICANN budget cycle. 
    4..  
    5.. Membership Criteria and Roles, Functions, Duties: We tried to state 
more clearly the size and composition of the OTF at the start of the section 
and we decided to make the Steering Committee contingent on the size of the 
OTF/number of volunteers. [Gomes, Chuck] I like the way you changed the 
steering committee but I have one more caution: you shouldn't be surprised if 
you cannot get a volunteer from every constituency or stakeholder group.  It is 
a good goal to do that but I think it would be wise to word the goal in a way 
that allows for the eventuality that one or more constituencies or stakeholder 
groups may not be represented.  How about something like this: ". . . small 
Steering Committee that would include the Chair, Vice Chair, and at least one 
representative from each Stakeholder Group or at least two representatives from 
each House."  Note that this might result in a steering committee as small as 
six but it could still be larger if there were enough volunteers.  Note that 
changes in this regard would affect wording in several other places in your 
document. 
    6.. Status Report:   We adjusted this to add flexibility by removing the 
requirement for reporting at each Council meeting. [Gomes, Chuck] I like what 
you did here. 
    7.. Additional Change:  We realized that we needed to reflect that the 
Council will appoint the Chair and Vice Chair, so we included this step.  In 
addition, since there initially would not be a Steering Committee, we assigned 
the recruitment role to the Chair, Vice Chair, and support staff.  This should 
be reflected throughout the document.[Gomes, Chuck] This seems fine to me but I 
do want to comment on the following: "Objective 1: The GNSO Council shall 
approve the Charter and appoint the OTF Chair, who also is the GNSO Council 
Liaison, and the Vice Chair."  It appears to me that this requires the OTF 
Chair to be a Councilor; are you sure you want to do that? I believe that 
Council liaisons are normally Councilors.  Assuming that is true, what happens 
if you cannot find a Councilor who will be OTF Chair?  If I was you, I would 
consider deleting "who also is the GNSO Council Liaison".   Qualified chairs 
are hard enough to find without be too restrictive.  On the other hand, if it 
is okay for the liaison to be a non-Councilor, your language may be okay, but 
if that is the case I suggest you make that clear.  Note that this issue occurs 
again in Deliverable # 1, in the steering committee discussion, under Formation 
and in Roles, Functions & Duties.
  [Gomes, Chuck] Your goal is that "the size does not hinder the ability of the 
OTF to complete its work in a timely fashion."  I personally have a hard time 
understanding how a group of up to 45 could complete its work in a timely 
fashion.  First of all, it is hard enough to scheduled meetings or coordinate 
activities with 10 people, let alone 45.  I think you will need a carefully 
designed plan to ensure timely progress and simultaneously heard 45 people but 
maybe you already have ideas to make that happen.  On a somewhat related note, 
you require a minimum of 35 OTF members (at least 7 per region); what happens 
if you cannot achieve that requirement.  At a minimum, if you are convinced 
that it would be helpful and workable to have that many, I think you should at 
least allow some flexibility for fewer members to cover the possibility that 
you cannot get that many volunteers. Maybe something like this: "The OTC shall 
be composed of a minimum of two members from each geographical region and may 
contain up to (whatever maximum # you think best)."
  Minor edit:  There are at least a two places where the term "public form" 
should be changed to "public forum".

  Our goal is to provide the revised Charter to the Council for consideration 
at its meeting on 26 October in Dakar.  Since yours are the only comments we 
have received, if you could address our revisions by COB Monday the 17th, we 
would like to try to revise the document and submit it to the Council in time 
for the document deadline on Tuesday, 18 October.  We hope that this will give 
you enough time to review the document, if not please let us know.

  Thank you again for your comments.  We do think that they have aided us in 
improving the document.

  Best regards,

  Julie

  Julie Hedlund
  Policy Director - on behalf of the members of the OTF-DT