ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-wpm-dt]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-wpm-dt] RE: Today's 6 April Teleconference

  • To: <gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-wpm-dt] RE: Today's 6 April Teleconference
  • From: "Ken Bour" <ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 10:15:50 -0400

I accidentally hit the "send" button before attaching the 2nd document.
Here it is.

 

Ken

 

From: Ken Bour [mailto:ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:14 AM
To: gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Today's 6 April Teleconference

 

WPM Team Members:

 

I have attached two Word documents that will also be uploaded to the Adobe
Connect room (as PDFs) at http://icann.na3.acrobat.com/gnsowprioritization/.


 

1)      Section 6 + Annex are almost the same as I sent to the team on 29
March (KBv6).   Chuck's suggestion for a wording change to 2.3.2 was
incorporated.   I don't believe that there were any additional comments on
the combined document during the past week.   The changes from the last
teleconference continue to be redlined so that they will be pretty easy to
walk through if that is the team's desire.  My transmittal email outlined
which sections were amended.  

 

2)      The Cover Letter now includes the consolidated replacement for
paragraphs 1 & 2 that I submitted to the list on 30 March (per Chuck's
request) as well as Jaime's suggestions for the penultimate paragraph
(redlined).  

 

Hopefully, we can finalize and approve both documents in today's session and
also discuss what, if anything, needs to be done in preparation for the
Council meeting on 21 April.   A few considerations that occurred to me are
repeated below with Chuck's comments in blue text:

 

.         Training considerations?  

.         When should the Council undertake its first prioritization?
[Gomes, Chuck]  I suggest that our goal should be to submit our proposal for
Council consideration in the 21 April Council meeting and this question
should be asked in that meeting with any recommendations we might like to
make. 

.         As I mentioned on today's call, the GCOT was assigned the
following task in its Charter: 

"Determine what steps are needed to establish the role of the Council as a
'strategic manager' of the policy process."
Does the DT want to make a recommendation to the OSC and Council as to which
team, if not itself, should be tasked with developing the "managerial"
elements that would effectively utilize the prioritizations?  [Gomes, Chuck]
What about inviting Philip Sheppard (OSC Chair) and/or Ray Fassett (GCOT)
chair to our next meeting to discuss this.  If we do that, we probably
should send them the documents for their review before the meeting so that
they understand the context for that meeting. 

 

 

Ken Bour

 

Attachment: Work Prioritization-Section 6 & ANNEX (KBv6).doc
Description: MS-Word document



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy