Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] Restructuring and Bylaws meeting on Saturday during gTLD update???

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Sorry about the wording.  I was not asking about sequential time in a  
council member's day - I know that is already overextended beyond what  
is often considered reasonable.  Rather, I was asking about the  
ability of constituencies mostly, to participate in both meeting  
activities in parallel using multiple participants.
On seeing a result of 8:1, I am assuming it would be folly to schedule  
things in parallel on Saturday and will not do so.
Thanks for the quick participation in the poll.

a.



On 4 Jun 2009, at 10:29, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:

> Avri,
>
> I've just completed the poll. If I may, I think the way the 2  
> questions are
> phrased makes it very difficult to NOT choose the second one. We are
> obviously all needed on these two issues which are our own overarching
> issues at the moment. But I think the question you are really asking  
> is
> simply, is there enough time in a GNSO Councillor's day to work on  
> both? In
> that light, I'm not sure the answer is so obvious.
>
> StéphaneHi,
> Le 03/06/09 20:09, « Avri Doria » <avri@xxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> > It is obvious that we will have a lot to do on this in Sydney.
> >
> > Currently we are planning a full schedule of gTLD, overarching issues
> > and DAG discussion on Saturday.  I am wondering if it is possible to
> > hold parallel sessions on restructuring while the update on the DAG
> > and the gTLD issues.
> >
> > While it is important to monitor the DAG as it morphs from what was
> > recommended by the GNSO to what it will become, we also need to get
> > the restructuring work done.
> >
> > So can we manage both in parallel?
> >
> > My inclination is that we should be able to, but I know I am often
> > wrong about these things.
> >
> > So, Yet Another Poll.
> >
> > http://www.doodle.com/pkin9yxhm9m46w5q
> >
> > thanks
> >
> >
> > a.