[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Santiago DNSO GA Schedule - Is a full day needed ?
Thanks for prompting me to clarify my terminology.
For clarification therefore, when I speak of the General Assembly, I
think of it as having too component activities - the Working Groups
of the General Assembly - and the Plenary meeting of the General
Assembly. (See my proposed agenda for the General Assembly -
from which it should be clear that the majority of the General
Assembly time is to be spent in the WG activities.)
The General Assembly IS the DNSO - not to be confused with the
Constituencies which are the component parts of the General
Assembly - nor (especially) to be confused with the Names Council
which is the administration committee of the DNSO.
Date sent: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 01:26:41 +0200
From: Amadeu Abril i Abril <Amadeu@nominalia.com>
Subject: Re: [ga] Santiago DNSO GA Schedule - Is a full day needed ?
Copies to: firstname.lastname@example.org, Andrew McLaughlin <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Dennis Jennings wrote:
> > DNSO GA Members,
> > The fact that the ICANN Board meeting is open to observers may
> > clobber my suggestion that the DNSO GA continue on the
> > Thursday morning - I was assuming that the ICANN Board meeting
> > would again be closed. My mistake.
> > But first things first:
> > Are we agreed that we need a full day for the General Assembly ?
> No. Some people, a handfull to be correct, expressed that opinion. If you want
> mine, this "could"" be a very good dea, but we should test it in Santiago. WGs
> and consituencies are the places where the real work has to be carried out,
> while the GA is the place for general gathering, reports, discuisiion,
> oversight and direction. It "might" turn out that a full day is needed (which
> i tend to believe is true) but it could turn out that it is not (specially if
> we dicsove that there are not, or only a few GA-only attendees, ie, people who
> will not attend WGs and consituency meetings as well. In my view, more spce
> for WGs is even more needd than a full day GA. If you remember Berlin, the GA
> slot was more than enough. Santiago will give us a more clearer idea. Any
> decision right now, in one sense or another, would be premature at best.
> > (we will also try to use this list for reports as suggested by Bret
> > Fausett)
> > So far, the answer is yes - but maybe there are lots of people on
> > the list who have not responded.
> > If we need a full day, should we
> > (a) keep the published schedule and use the Thursday morning for
> > the Working Groups (after all, we can only observe the Board
> > meeting and not comment) ?
> I am confused here: GA should refer to "plenary" GA meetings. Consituency
> meetings, NC meetings and WGs meetings are "not" GA meetings. And all of them
> are DNSO meetings.
> Remember, btw that on Thu morning there is also a NC meeting, if I am not mistaken.
> Why not having WGs on Tghu afternoon? (Well, probably because of travel arrangments....)
> > or
> > (b) change the schedule as has been suggested and move the
> > Constituency meetings to the Monday afternoon - a view has been
> > expressed is that it is not a problem to change flights ?
> No Dennis. This can simply not be done.
> Best regards,
Dennis M. Jennings
Director, Computing Services, University College Dublin.
Address: Daedalus Building, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
Telephone: +353-(1) 706 7817
Fax: +353-(1) 706 2362