Seth Greene: Hi, I’m happy to do it Heidi. I believe the people on the call are Gareth, Dev, Dave Kissoondoyal, Cheryl, Tijani, and Olivier. Have I missed anyone?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: It’s good. I want confirmation that Dave from Africa, from those issues is here, is on the call. He’s only on the- Perhaps he’s only on the Adobe Connect.
Heidi Ullrich: I heard him. Dave, you’re on the call, right.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: This is Dev Anand Teelucksingh. I’m just making sure I get that out of the way. I’ll keep quiet.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Dave Kissoondoyal is on the call. Yes.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes.
Dave Kissoondoyal: Yes, I am on the call. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Very good. Fantastic. So we can perhaps please start the meeting. And we will, the roll call has already done by Seth. The second point is the review of the action items. We have three action items and the three action items are already completed. They were done in Cartagena. If you want I can read them: Seth to incorporate the agreed upon SWOT revisions into a version two analysis, it was done; and Olivier, Tijani and Dave to review the revisions the Work Team made to the strategic planning and operational planning SWOT analysis after Seth incorporates them, and it is also done.
The third point was Olivier, Tijani and Dave to review and to revise the Work Team’s budgetary planning SWOT analysis that the Work Team did not get to during its 6th December meeting, and it’s also done. So we will go to the items for discussion. Number three – finalization of SWOT analysis: resolution of the remaining points. So if you have the SWOT analysis version two in front of you, you will see colors and those colors are the points that Seth asked and some clarification from Olivier. This afternoon I worked with Olivier to try to find answers to all those questions and with the green color we have those.
James Corbin: James Corbin.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Hi, James.
Heidi Ullrich: Hi, James.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, does everyone have the SWOT analysis version two in front of them?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: I want to have your reaction because we did it, Olivier, Dave and myself, together with Cheryl at the beginning. We did it in Cartagena so I want your reaction. The strategy planning is not colored so Seth didn’t raise any questions. But for the operational planning there is some colors and I do want you to react.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You don’t want me to react. So I won’t.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Huh, Cheryl?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I’m not going to react. You’ve had all my input. Others need to react.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: I want you, if you have the SWOT analysis in front of you, you will see that for the operational planning you have point number B.S.2 – local organization was added by Olivier. Knowledge brings unbiased view of operations. And there is two points under this point – it will lower the cost for implementation and local political insight for ICANN. And political was added by Olivier also to answer the concern of Dev that is written in red. Now this seems to be simply a repeat of the AL offer local knowledge, which is already in the other point. So it is not the same because we explained why, if you read the pink comment of Olivier, it explains that local knowledge and local insight is slightly different. Since the local knowledge is of an organizational matter and the local insight is of a political matter.
Perhaps Olivier can explain better than me. Olivier?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you, Tijani. Effectively, and I don’t think we should spend so much time on this now, I just wonder if no one has any comments on this. I mean there were questions which Seth came back with which were written in red with regards to the way that the SWOT was written. I’ve added some things in blue and then some comments in purple. If no one has any comments on that then I guess this probably is it and we can probably move on to the next part, Tijani.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: You think so? Okay, if all agree we can go to the next point.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Before you arrived I did ask everyone to have a last look at this SWOT and so I suspect that everyone has had a look at it now and has had a read through it and if it’s all fine then let’s move on to the next thing.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, very good. So, the next point is the discussion of SWOT analysis application to Work Team C’s recommendation five and six tasks and the resulting next step. So, it will be the same, Olivier. We will work on the SWOT plus the simplified improvements outline. Are the members ready to do so now? Is it possible?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: If I may say, Tijani, there are a number of suggestions in the chat. A number of questions, what is the next step with regards to the SWOT and then Cheryl also mentions that we should really ask for regional input and expertise on this. Do you wish to explain this, Cheryl, please?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well certainly. Specifically from an Asia-Pacific point of view, each of the regions are very different beasts and particularly with reference to the political and local knowledge aspects, which in Part B – Operational Planning you’ve raised in your edits Olivier. APRALO for one would have some very particular views on all of this, most of which would boil down to keep out of our business, thank you, go away.
We spend a lot of time working in some fairly complicated political environments due to time mechanisms where we can move forward in the wonderful world of ICANN, and similar internet ecosystems, and people coming in with great, big, heavy boots and stomping through our careful little daisy bushes won’t be appreciated.
So we would suggest that we take the facts to the regions at this point and ask specifically for mechanisms as a subset, how the RALOs, which after all is where much of this input for operational planning needs to come from and indeed where ramifications of the budget and cost modeling we need to do will be effective, and make sure that they take direct responsibility.
Now this may mean that we end up recommending that there is an ongoing role for a work group as a formal subset of an ALAC standing committee, or as a standing committee itself, that is populated directly by regional representation – note, I’m not saying ALAC representation, I’m saying regional representation – and that it works directly with selected members for the ALAC as a whole.
So it could be Ex Com, it could be a coordinator or a lead, it could be community as a whole to ensure that the operational planning and the budgetary aspects are properly attended to. We were aware, for example, in our APRALO meeting yesterday, that here we are on the 4th, as it falls in our part of the world, of January holding a meeting where we have closing of public comments on the 10th of January for the ICANN strategic plan.
Whilst APRALO had put forward some comments to the strategic planning community wiki page, we felt that as one of the few RALOs that had not been given the time because of the circumstances as holidays and vacations and time being what it is, between the presentation that Kurt made to various others in Cartagena and now to have a review of that the best we could do, for example, was update if at all possible those need to comment. These are things if we owned and had input into earlier, and there was a tier requirement for each to do so, might help us next time around.
I think that pretty much covers it, Olivier. We also want to be able to make sure that the ALSs are involved. That could add another layer of complexity into it.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: May I make a comment, Tijani?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, please.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you, Cheryl. I wholeheartedly agree with you. There is one thing though I think is, with regards to the strategic planning is that time has not been on our side, as you mentioned with regards to the holidays and people being away. It is the first time that we are given a chance to provide input earlier and it seems that we are not ready yet to provide extensive input. And so I do hope that we will able to discuss this in the next couple of days so as to provide perhaps at least a minimum amount of input. I can see several regions have shown that they’re going to provide some input into the strategic planning and I hope that the remaining regions will also do that.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, thank you. Cheryl, I will tell you what is my feeling. We, in this Working Group, we have representatives of all regions. And my understanding is that those representatives will bring our work to their RALOs, their regional organization, and to share it with the ALSs so that we will get the feedback from the RALO and come back to our Working Team and provide input.
That’s the way I understand the work had to be done, but nevertheless if there is not, if it is what is done, we can also ask people from the regions react to this work and give us their input. Perhaps they will disagree, but we have to listen to them, but we don’t have much time, as you know. So perhaps we need that defined time for a deadline…
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Tijani, let me be really clear. Fouad and I report, interact and gain information to bring back to each of the work teams that Asia Pacific is represented in. That is happening. What we’re saying is, that at this point in time, if you are now to the point of taking for more comments for this SWOT analysis, that it should go formally to the RALO from the Work Team for their considered input. It’s not a matter of reporting and interaction, that is happening as I’ve seen it happen in EURALO and as I’ve seen it happen in LACRALO and NORALO as well. I’m sure it happens in AFRALO with you as the co-chair.
This is a matter of is this documentation now to a point where we need to toss it over the fence and get more formal input on. APRALO thinks it should be. That’s what I’m saying.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, no problem. So, one of the action items of this meeting is that we have to send to the RALOs officially, formally the SWOT as it is now. We will clean it a little bit, Olivier, together and send it to the RALOs and also we will send them the improvement table, the Google Doc, also. And this fits with the comments we have on so that people can see it and can understand what is the mechanism, what is the way we are working. And we ask for their comment. Does it work?
Okay, very good. So Olivier, we have to ask the RALOs as soon as possible. Okay. Any other comment on this point? Okay. So I think we will go to the point number five – any other business. You have something to add Olivier? Any other business?
Heidi Ullrich: Tijani, this is Heidi. Could I just go back to that last point?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, please.
Heidi Ullrich: Thank you for moving this forward. Is there a deadline? Do you think that there should be a deadline for feedback from the RALOs? So, we’ve just started the series of monthly calls, should we say we allow them through the end of the month or do we do it sooner?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: I am sorry.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, just wondering what the deadline for the RALO feedback should be.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, you are asking for the deadline. I think we have to give them at least two weeks, ten days. This is my proposal.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Right, well can I just say that with the old calendar year in many countries in my region, we have other things we’ll be doing. So take whatever APRALO has put forward and will put forward before the lunar New Year as all you’ll be getting. We will be meeting at the end of this month if there is an item on our agenda that reflects any of the feedback that this Work Team requires, we will deal with it then. That’s it. We meet at the last Tuesday of a calendar month.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: So you propose at least one month?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I’m just telling you when APRALO meets. And if you make a deadline in two weeks that’s fine also, I’m just telling you when APRALO meets.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, Olivier, please.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Tijani. If I could just add a couple of comments. Seth has mentioned that the work has to be done around by March. So, I don’t think there is a requirement to speed things up to just have two weeks for feedback from the RALOs when we’ve got a couple of months left until the work needs to be completed. Certainly a month is a minimum, especially meaning that if there is going to be a discussion at RALO level, then some RALOs have just had their conference call, their monthly call and so they will need to table it for their next monthly call. And they will need to have their delegates, representatives to actually read through the documents.
I can see here that Cheryl mentioned that for the APRALO ALSs input it takes two months. It may be that we have to consider two months. That’s something, if you want that you can I can discuss later on and find out. But if everything can be done by March then that’s a good thing. The fact that we do need RALO input is something particularly important. At the same time, it doesn’t stop us from already starting to map these SWOTs with the recommendations and to start making progress on that simultaneously. It’s just the RALO input is definitely something that will help a lot on these. That’s all for the time being, thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, my question is, what we will be doing during those two months in the working group.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: May I answer? As I said, we can already start work on mapping what we’ve found with the SWOT with the recommendations with the actual page of recommendations in the Google Document. It’s just the RALO input is going to be supplemental on what we’ve had so far. That’s my feeling at least. And if anyone disagrees on that then please speak out.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: It means that we have to anticipate the work, that’s it. Isn’t it? We have to anticipate and correct according to the RALO reactions, RALO input.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I mean Tijani, when you look at the size of the SWOT there are many, many different things in there and I think we might have either more material then we need or we might have material which will get our At-Large improvements sheets to grow. So we can start mapping now whilst waiting for the RALO input and then we’ll map the RALO input when it comes in. I don’t think we should wait for everything to be in and then start mapping because otherwise we’ll be waiting until June for it to be done. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay. Any other reaction? Okay, I see all what Cheryl wrote in the chat. Very good, okay. Cheryl is okay with Olivier statements. Andy other point of view, any other things to say? So, shall we go to any other business? Do you have something to say, Olivier on any other business. I don’t think that we can say anything now.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Olivier, were you hoping to get any drafting input for the ALAC statement, public comment on the current ICANN strategic planning out of today’s meeting or not? Just leave that to the work on the wiki, what approach are you taking? I haven’t read the email number 1,047 if you sent it between now and…
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: The work of this Working Team, the WT C, is one of the improvements to the process. I don’t think we actually deal with the actual contents of the strategic input which we have to provide in the next couple of days. This is why I was going to keep that separate.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And who in the executive committee are chairing this team? Previously the responses from public comment to strategic planning and budget over the years from 2005, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 have gone from the Chair writing it to the ex-com and a budget and finance committee writing it to what and who is going to write it now. I’m asking that question.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Cheryl we are ready to do so, ready to take the lead to comment on the ICANN strategic planning, but it will not be according to the results of our work, that’s the problem, because we didn’t go far in our work. So it is not a problem. I already drafted the comment of AFRALO and we will discuss it tomorrow in our call. And we will send it to the ALAC because I think it will be one of the elements that the ALAC comments have to take into account. If you want I can, with Olivier or with anyone who wants, we can prepare something.
Anyway, tomorrow, not tomorrow, on Thursday we will have the ex-com meeting and we can decide on who will prepare something for ALAC comments.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: May I say something? Yes, definitely this is something which will be discussed during the ex-com call. And with regards to Cheryl’s question as to who will write it now, this is something which of course I’m considering writing based on the input from the various regions that are out there. And so it’s something which I’ll probably be concentrating on sometimes tomorrow.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can I then ask, because that’s where I was hoping we might head, has staff or have we as in ALAC asked the regions to update and specifically put in some of their input. I did ask that of APRALO. We’ve seen what AFRALO has put in, but some of the other comments on the strategic planning page, coming in from EURALO and NORALO, were really pre-Cartagena. Have we formally asked these regional leaderships to update or have some more input? Clocks ticking and I’m just concerned that we haven’t been doing communications exercise that we might need to. Yes, timing has been bad, but most people are back now.
There is a possibility to get some more material, particularly if they put it directly onto the confluence wiki page. Each of the RALO leaderships could simply ask their ALSs if they were so inclined to put comments in directly to that page, that sort of thing. But that’s the disease, in fact, one of the weaknesses that we’ve identified – the complexity of the communication between the edges and those who are entrusted with finalizing drafting and text in response to those. It’s something that this team needs to find mechanisms to address.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: May I reply to Cheryl, Tijani? Thank you. I have seen your message, Cheryl, on the ALAC list. And I was hoping that this was going to be carried over to the different regions. I have personally, on the EURALO front, notified our Chair of this and so far, there has been very little response from many different people. I’m not even sure if the EURALO Chair is back in action.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Bad timing. Really bad timing.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Very bad timing. So, I mean I just wonder, we might not have some people back in action, or ex-com yet, I’m not sure either. But it looks as though not everyone is in action at the moment so it’s certainly slowing our process down.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And from an Asian point of view, which is why I was concerned about not so much (inaudible 0:29:32) and recommendations in place for next time, in other words, actionable by June of this coming year.
When you have January dates it is all very nice for northern hemisphere cultures who have finished their festivities by the end of January, but Asia goes into its most important celebration and holiday time. There are for example in Tết requirements for people to be totally at home and devoted to their familial celebrations in the post lunar New Year period. It gets really, really complicates. And it’s almost like our dates, our use, our close of contribution dates need to be very carefully looked at.
And so for those of us working in regions and with cultures, or in communication areas where these are going to provide difficulties, they only way we’re going to get then input is to get it in early and well planned in advance. And I was rather hopeful that this Work Team would be able to come up with some planning possibilities to make that happen, at least in the 2011-12 review process.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well, certainly the SWOT is going to identify this as a major weakness and I’m sure that will therefore translate to an action item or at least into a recommendation that it gets taken into account for the next cycle. As far as this current cycle is concerned, the only thing I could mention would be perhaps to ask for an extension of our deadline.
I’m not sure whether that is possible or not, it’s a wild guess, it’s a wild try. And since it’s the first time that this cycle is taking place it might be that we might get a positive answer due to the special circumstances that we’ve been told so recently about how the process works.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The other argument of course is get what we can done based on what we have got done in the best way possible. And there I’m speaking from an ALAC point of view. It won’t be the first time that a Chair of the ALAC has written the response and taken into account and tended the datum, comments from the regions and ALSs. It’s been done before. It’s possible to do it again. It’s not ideal, but it’s better than nothing.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Point taken.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Who wanted to speak? Seth? No?
Seth Greene: No, I’m sorry. Not me, Tijani, thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, no problem. If you want my experience at the RALO level, if you don’t draft something and propose it for comment they will not generally take the time to draft anything themselves. So the best is to prepare something for them and its more easy for them to comment on something which is there then to draft something themselves. So it’s perhaps a good way to stimulate the comments or the points of view.
Anyway so we decided that we will send to that RALOs officially for comment the SWOT, the improvement Google Doc, and the presentation of Cartagena that we didn’t present in Cartagena; we didn’t have time to present, you remember? So we will send all that, all this material and ask for their comments or their input. We will give them two months, as Cheryl asked, and in the meantime we will try to work on our improvement table and update it as along with what will come from the RALOs. Is this okay? You agree with this (summary 0:34:29)? Okay, no reaction.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, I’m typing.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, you’ll see it when I type it. I mean I get tired of hearing my voice; I’m sure everyone else does as well.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, no problem. Cheryl, what you said now, I didn’t hear it? Please repeat it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I said I was typing my responses. I’ll read it to the record. Matthias needs to ensure that the agenda and prep time is given to this call for input though when we make it to the RALOs. It’s all very good us making these calls and these edicts, but that’s no different to ICANN putting something out on a website saying it’s now open for public comment. It actually has to be pushed. It has to be managed. It has to be, in some cases, micromanaged with the leadership of the region and that, as I understand it Heidi, correct me if I’m wrong, is Matthias’ role.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, we’ll, I’ll write him on this. And I’ll be following it as well.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Good. Okay, Olivier please.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you, Tijani. I think that Seth was before me, had his hand up before me.
Seth Greene: Oh please, Olivier. Go ahead and I’ll follow you.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well it was just, thank you Seth, it was just to mention that with regards to the SWOT, there are section numbers and, well each statement has actually got a reference, like A.S.1 – A.S.2, and that is a shorthand way of referring to each one of those statements was for them to be able to be mapped on the actual Google Document that we have for the At-Large improvements. That was just one point I wanted to make. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Thank you. Seth?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That was great actually. It took me a moment, but I worked out what the code was.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Seth, please.
Seth Greene: Thank you, Tijani. I just wanted to confirm you said, I actually had unfortunately dropped off the call momentarily, but I heard you say a moment ago that it was decided to give the RALOs two months to get back to the Work Team?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yeah, that was the proposal of Cheryl, yes.
Seth Greene: So I’m sorry, two months was what was decided?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Two months.
Seth Greene: Okay, thank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: If I may, Tijani. Seth, I think the instructions to Matthias and how he micromanages this regional leadership needs to be really, really specific. Saying two months does not mean that in the end of February they can start thinking about this. What it means is, it needs to be on the current January meeting agenda for them to have the appropriate amount of time to get their ALS input back.
So in the February meeting agendas, they, the regions, have facilitated their out and in reach and have gathered their information and have then got stuff in a form ready to give back to us at the end of February in preparation for our March face-to-face meeting.
I think it’s a big difference between giving a closing date and giving a plan, a project plan that runs two months.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, I see. Yes, Dev, I think when we get all the input from the regions we will have the version three of this form. It was a question of Dev on the chat.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And if I could answer, Tijani, I’ll read my answer. The version one was the one where all the input came in. The version two was the one which was streamlined. There is no version planned as such. The input should go into the version one and then it will be compared with the version two so as to complete version two SWOTs. Going from version to version sounds too much like the draft applicant guidebook, which reaches astronomical numbers and we definitely don’t want it to last that long. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: No, why I said that to be a version three because the version two will be used by the regions to comment on. So we will get the comments and I think the clean version will be the last one, the version three. That’s it.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Oh, okay.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: That’s my point. If you have other point of view?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I think the contents are more important than the version number.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: That’s right. Final version, that’s it. So, coming back to the agenda, any other business – so I think that, is there any other business you want to mention.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: If I may say, Tijani, Seth has his hand up.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Pardon? Okay, the next meeting will be confirmed on 18 January at 20 UTC.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Tijani?! Seth has his hands and his leg up now, he would like to speak.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Seth, please.
Seth Greene: Thank you, Tijani. Let me just get my leg down. I just wanted to say that on a practical way of going forward if I may, I will, after this meeting tomorrow perhaps, why don’t I try to get a hold of both you and Olivier and anyone else interested. We’ll get rid of the remaining color in version two and then I’m happy to prepare a clean SWOT version that Matthias can then distribute to the RALOs. If that’s alright? And we won’t record any version numbers at all.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Thank you. Good point. And I am sorry; I didn’t see your hand up. And even what Olivier said, I am hearing very bad on the phone today so I am sorry.
Seth Greene: No problem.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay, is there any other point? Someone wants to add something? If not, I will close the meeting. So thank you for…
Dave Kissoondoyal: Tijani, before we confirm the date and time of the next meeting, is it possible to go up for a Doodle poll? Remember we received an email from one of the members saying that it is 3:00 in the morning at their place. So it could be better that we do a Doodle poll so that the time is convenient to all, each and everybody. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay. So do you want to, do you want that the time will be considered?
Dave Kissoondoyal: Yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can we specify what options we are asking the Doodle polls to give? I mean if 3:00 am is an issue, and I can imagine for some people it would be, especially in the midst of winter which is I’m sure where Fouad is at the moment. It was so cold he could barely move his fingers in the APRALO call and that was technically in the middle of his afternoon.
So are we going to suggest moving it on another two hours, another three hours? I mean this is important to instruct Gisella what options she should be giving. And of course, those options need to be humane for those in the European time zones, and the North American time zones. We need to, I think, be specific Dave as to what we’re offering.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, sure. But Cheryl perhaps if we open a Doodle for a day, for the next call day and the whole day and see what is the preference of people in all regions and then try to find the best time because if we…
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, so you’re suggesting the fixed date and day and offer a “Select your possible can do and cannot do times for a full 24-hour period”.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: That’s it. Olivier?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright. As long as it’s clear what we’re asking Gisella to set up, then that’ll be an interesting exercise.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Olivier?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you, Tijani. Two things – the Doodle was done in the early days. And the most popular time, due to the composition of this group, ended up being the time that we are using now. One of the things that we have to also abide by is the amount of, well staff availability as well as the conference call facility availability, which we do not have for the full day because other meetings and other things are taking place during the day as well. We’re sharing this with other working groups. We’re sharing it with other conference calls taking place all for At-Large. So that’s one thing to bear in mind.
On the other hand, I’m sure that because the calls are always at this time and because it’s always the same regions that are having the hardest time in there, perhaps some of us in those regions that have been blessed with very social hours so far can make a bit of a courtesy gesture by being a little bit more supple about having a call at 2:00 in the morning, let’s say. Just something to note. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, but what is the solution? Shall we keep the same time? Olivier?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: No, you misunderstood me, Tijani. Go ahead with the Doodle. Go ahead with the Doodle for the day, find out where the times are, but let’s not just settle for the one that is going to be the most appropriate for Europe. If we do a Doodle and end up with one which comes up with the same time as this time around perhaps we could have one or two calls every couple of calls, or every three calls, that suggests another time zone. It’s just a suggestion. I’m not sure how others feel about it, but it’s just a suggestion.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay. So we will do a Doodle for the next call and we will see what will be the result, and after that perhaps we’ll decide to make it evolving, changing time every time to accommodate one region and not the other, etc. Isn’t it? No.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yeah, keep the day the same, but do a 24-hour Doodle on the date. Of course, excluding those hours where staff already knows that the line is not going to be available or they’re not going to be available. Thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Sure. Without them we would not do anything. Okay.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Cheryl has made a suggestion with regards to the Doodles. Cheryl I will, I think we’ll have to discuss this outside this meeting, but it’s something, there’s definitely some question with regards to getting more people involved with many of our meetings as well.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Honey, it just strikes me Olivier, that yesterday Fouad and I are calling for ALSs to find members, not even their representatives, to find members to join our Work Team. And given them a link to the wiki workspaces and we’re about to start changing the goal posts on at least the timing. We might need to at least keep the regional list informed of any options and any changes because is may make a huge difference. Some countries take a very dim view of people doing calls in their work hours, others don’t have a problem with it at all. I mean it may make a big difference in getting fresh blood into the workspace.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Would you say that having irregular hours, in other words, instead of having this Work Team meet every two weeks at 20:00, or is it 19:00 UTC, it would one week meet at 19:00 UTC, one week at 8 UTC, one week at…
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The rotational option is one that some parts of ICANN use. I believe it’s up to staff to react to what is better or not better in terms of people actually turning up, but I would suggest that the most important thing is predictability. So if something goes on to a rotational system, it needs to be fixed.
In other words, it will be a 6, 8, or 10 hour forward rotation so that people like Gisella can do proper planning and avoid pressure wherever possible. It really doesn’t matter that much what it is, as long as it is highly predictable. And in an ideal world you would have blocks of time across every particular day that can be devoted to various Work Group or Work Team conference calls, and it shouldn’t matter greatly which one of them occupies it as long as they don’t clash.
But this is really something I would suggest you share with the ALAC, have a decent meeting or conversation with not only Heidi and Gisella, but some of the other planners in some of the SOs and ACs because it’s a bit bigger than just us.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay, thank you.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay. The 24-hour Doodle will show us what is the best time for each region and then we can perhaps decide on what Cheryl said. So, can I close the meeting? If nothing else… Okay, thank you very much. And have a good night for those who will sleep and have a good day for those who just wake up.
Heidi Ullrich: Thank you, Tijani.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you, Tijani.
[End of Transcript]
