Summary/analysis of comments for Meetings Reform
- To: "meeting-consultation-2008@xxxxxxxxx" <meeting-consultation-2008@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Summary/analysis of comments for Meetings Reform
- From: Kieren McCarthy <kieren.mccarthy@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:06:24 -0700
[Posted by ICANN's general manager of public participation on behalf of Paul
Levins, VP of Corporate Affairs]
Summary and analysis of public comments for:
Comment period ended: Thursday 10 July 2008
Summary published: Monday 11 August 2008
A Meetings Reform Paper asked the community to consider a number of changes to
the international public meetings that ICANN holds. The two main proposed
changes were: that the number of meetings be reduced from three to two per year
- a change that would commence from 2010; and that one of the two meetings be
held in locations that are transport hubs.
There has not been substantive change to meetings processes or the frequency of
the meetings since the organization's inception. The purpose of the paper was
to encourage debate on any matters to do with meetings that the community may
wish to raise, but to especially consider issues concerning the frequency of
meetings and their location.
11 comments were received to the comment forum.
There were a variety of views expressed including:
6 were opposed to the reduction in the number of meetings for reasons that
* It would put strain on the community;
* Face to face meetings are crucial;
* The speed of policy development would be slowed;
* It is an anathema to increasing participation;
* People with limited resources to attend meetings should just make a choice if
they can't afford to go to three meetings;
* 3 meetings in a year was no great feat;
* If budgetary concerns are the issue then savings should be found in areas
like translation and travel costs.
5 were in favour for reasons that include:
* It would improve the policy process
* It would make meetings more efficient;
* It would advance the overall quality of the meeting;
* It would be a 'big step forward' in meeting efficiency and participation.
There were also a range of suggestions about general improvements to meetings
* Use of exit research to get suggestions;
* A detailed agenda published way in advance of the meeting;
* More regional meetings;
* That the registration and website be sponsored to reduce costs of producing
On the issue of meeting location only 4 responses expressed a view with all of
those being in support of the idea.
There were also consultations and discussions held at the Paris meeting. The
transcripts of those discussions held in public forum are available at:
This consultation will be used to inform recommendations to be out to the Board.
AM Andrew Mancey, Project Officer, DevNet
CC Cyril Chua, Partner, Alban Tay Mahtani & de Silva LLP
CW Clarke D. Walton, Business Constituency, GNSO
DA Danny Aerts, CEO, .SE
ED Eduardo Diaz
MF Marcus Faure, CORE Council of Registrars
RA Ron Andruff, RNA Partners
RD Rudi Daniel, St Vincent & the Grenadines Private Sector Knowledge
SM Steven Metalitz, Intellectual Property Constituency, GNSO
VB Vittorio Bertola, ISOC Italy
VC Veronica Cretu, former ICANN ALAC member (EURALO), President, CMB