Summary/analysis of comments for Meetings Reform

[Kieren McCarthy <kieren.mccarthy@xxxxxxxxx>]

[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:
MEETINGS REFORM

Comment period ended: Thursday 10 July 2008
Summary published: Monday 11 August 2008
BACKGROUND
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.

SUMMARY

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 
included:

* 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 
including:
* 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 
these.


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: 
https://par.icann.org/files/paris/Paris-ICANNPublicForum-25JUN08.txt

This consultation will be used to inform recommendations to be out to the Board.

CONTRIBUTORS

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 
Network
SM         Steven Metalitz, Intellectual Property Constituency, GNSO
VB          Vittorio Bertola, ISOC Italy
VC          Veronica Cretu, former ICANN ALAC member (EURALO), President, CMB   
Training