Re: [council] intake committee proposal
Ken, thanks for your comments on the IC set of
recommendations. They are most helpful. My comments follow.
-----------------------------------------
<the mandate of
this Committee?>
As the IC has its
origins in the Berkman proposal we thought it helpful to make recommendations to
the NC based on the scope of the proposals.
<Objectives: The
Chair and Secretariat should prepare the agenda. The IC should provide input,
but the agenda itself, and running of the meetings is the responsibility of the
Chair.>
We saw the IC as an
assistant to the NC Chair. If the IC is only a postbag, could this not ALL
be handled by a secretariat?
<Timing: Given the nature of the process, 21 days is far
too long of a time period to cut off proposed agenda items. It would seem that
10 days is much more practical.>
21 days is long. We got there by working back. What period of
notice does the NC want to see an agenda? We recommended 14 days to give time to
consult constituencies (then added 7 days for the IC to put an agenda
together).
<I would also suggest that the so-called ic e-mail concept
will quickly become another forum for expression and potential abuse. i frankly
do not feel it need be publicly archived>
I agree, there is potential for abuse.
<Contributors:Why would we not include
ICANN staff>
Good point - they should be added.
<Members: I am a bit confused here ... are you proposing
that non NC members be included on the IC ? >
We recommend the IC comprise a small number of NC members plus
the GA chair.
<Rules for
proposing an agenda for NC meetings: This section, at first blush, sounds like
an extensive filtering system. Proposals to the agenda should be possible
through the IC, and forwarded to the Chair. In almost every organization I have
ever been involved with it is the Chair who is responsible for prioritizing the
agendas and determining the significance of items to be discussed.
>
This is a good
point. We saw the IC as an assistant to the Chair. It is a big burden for a
volunteer chair to: prioritise an agenda, set guillotines, post to the NC
in time, co-ordinate posting of reports etc.
If the IC does not
add value by creating the agenda, what is its role? The status
of the IC agenda could be an agenda proposed to the NC chair who would have
the last say. (Note this involves extra time and needs to be built into the
timetable).
<Rules for
running the NC meetings need to be discussed ....(and)...need to be the
product of input from the entire NC>
We agree, we are
making a recommendation for discussion by the NC. This section is
intentionally separated from the first section. It is based on the Berkman
proposals which have been approved by the NC. This section, more or less,
summarises the way we have been running meetings up to now. It seemed helpful to
have it written down.
Hope this has helped clarify the thinking of the IC group
behind the ideas in the report.
Philip
|