Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the MADT call on Friday 08 February 2013 at 1700 UTC
Nathalie Peregrine:Agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/G4BwAg
Yaovi Atohoun:Hello
Heidi Ullrich:Hi All
Tijani BEN JEMAA:hello
Maureen Hilyard:LOL.. Windows for me too. and I've had good connectivity, fingers crossed
Heidi Ullrich:You should be able to scroll on your own
Carlton Samuels:Hiya all
Gisella Gruber-White:Welcome to all
Carlton Samuels:"sitting" has a specific meaning with respect to legitimacy
Carlton Samuels:Let's define it and see that it goes in the def structures
Maureen Hilyard:That would cover all concerns about the language
Carlton Samuels:The case is for a super-majority. This really means that 5 persons can in fact make the decision! Unless we dispense with the super-majority construct, we are left with this very awkward situation
Carlton Samuels:I can't hear OCL
Carlton Samuels:better
Carlton Samuels:What? Should not apply!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:we also need to remember our Primary Focus on Consensus decisions
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:hand up
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:down
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:AG covered my points
Carlton Samuels:I prefer a specific vote! The chair must have room to reconsider, too!
Heidi Ullrich:ok, Cheryl
Carlton Samuels:And what of secret ballots
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yes indeed Carlton
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I've seen that happen
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agree Alan
Carlton Samuels:Agree with Alan
Maureen Hilyard:agreed
Carlton Samuels:"Impact" works just fine!
Eduardo Diaz:Sorry I am late
Carlton Samuels:You don't have proxy people but you can have a proxy vote!
Heidi Ullrich:Welcome, Eduardo!
Gisella Gruber-White:Yaovi - we have muted you
Yaovi Atohoun:I am disconnected
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:back
Gisella Gruber-White:@ Yaovi - calling you back
Yaovi Atohoun:OK
Yaovi Atohoun:I am back
Gisella Gruber-White:Me ... sorry was trying to upload the document and the hands up were in my way
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:lol
Carlton Samuels:Hi Gisella, can we get the doc to scroll please
Carlton Samuels:?
Gisella Gruber-White:@ Carlton - done
Heidi Ullrich:Correct, Cheryl
Maureen Hilyard:unique identified makes things a lot easier to locate
Maureen Hilyard:unique identifier
Heidi Ullrich:Cheryl, are you talking about the number for each statement?
Heidi Ullrich:and each communication?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yes
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Current ALAC RoP Ref is: AL/2007/1/1.Rev10
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:or doc
Maureen Hilyard:some of our titles are rather long and complicated
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:We'll work out an updated Doc. Ref. No.
Heidi Ullrich:@Aland, do you mean this: http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/expected-standards
Heidi Ullrich:ok
Heidi Ullrich:That is the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:AL/ALAC/ROP/mmyy/DocNr/RevNr.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:in quality systems. you would in this master doc use the primary type & class etc., part of the identifier of a doc listed,and refer to the most recent version of <> n the text However in such systems. (and it avoids the version search issue AG referred to) a version LOG which must be updated of course is mandatory...
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Cheryl: as long as we avoid a reference code system like the ITU like: S12-WCIT12-121203-TD-0051!!MSW-E
Carlton Samuels:Here's the context. There must be a sense of natural justice retained. The present proposal assumes there is a prima facie case for code violation. So we better have a list of violations. And it will necessarily be a definitive list.
Maureen Hilyard:@ Olivier... true!
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:the exclamation marks provide the revision number
Carlton Samuels:#3 is too broadly defined
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:the minor revision number. The major revision number then has a V2 added afterwards, even though the exclamation marks remains.... anyway, I've probably gone on too long about this :-)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:how sensible such system IS up to those setting it but DOES often reflect their culture
Carlton Samuels:ALAC-related can mean anything from ALS up!
Darlene Thompson:I'm sorry for my lateness on the call
Carlton Samuels:+1 CLO. Give them some opening for redemption!
Carlton Samuels:Thatt will answer the natural justice issue
Darlene Thompson:There are examples on the mailing lists
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:indeed
Maureen Hilyard:+1 CLO
Eduardo Diaz:What is SOL?
Maureen Hilyard:Thanks Eduardo.. me too
Eduardo Diaz:SOI I know. Thanks.
Heidi Ullrich:Alan, I was wondering about that! ;)
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I was going to make a joke that it was an SOI with poor eyesight
Maureen Hilyard:If you expecting people to have an SOI in order to legitimately participate in an ALAC or other ALAC related meeting, perhaps it should be added
Maureen Hilyard:added to the rules
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Yes Maureen. This is my question.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:It's an open question -- yes or no. I'm not pushing in either direction
Carlton Samuels:Thanks all. Gotta run. Bye
Eduardo Diaz:@Darlenene: You can work at night (ja!)
Heidi Ullrich:AI: Next steps: 1) Clean up text prior to sending to the ALAC; 2) Send to the ALAC for Review via the ALAC-Working List; 3) Hold a single-issue ALAC meeting for the review of the revised ROPs. Olivier to extend the invitation to all the members of the various ROP Drafting Teams and the Chairs of the RALOs as observers. The ALAC members will have priority in speaking. 4) Once modifications are incorporated into the text, the ALAC is to vote on the revised ROPs as soon as possible thereafter but no later than 15 March.**
Heidi Ullrich:Thanks, Cherylk
Maureen Hilyard:Thank you guys
Eduardo Diaz:GRacias Alan
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:bye all
Yaovi Atohoun:Thank you
Gisella Gruber-White:Thank you all and have a great weekend
Heidi Ullrich:Bye
AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
