You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Next »

The call will take place on Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 13:00 UTC for 60 minutes.

For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/bdh77djt

PROPOSED AGENDA


BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS


PARTICIPATION

Apologies: Susan Payne

Attendance

RECORDINGS

Audio Recording

Zoom Recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript and chat)

GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar

Notes/ Action Items

HOMEWORK/ACTION ITEMS: Staff to send the final draft of the Recommendations Report to the group for review.

 Notes:

  1. Welcome

2. Review the input in the Google doc at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ujjuS4APION0uSHz2dKnDZCj8JDbTjQK/edit [docs.google.com]:

a.                   Suggestion

Corresponding Comments

An additional option is added to the question relating to Primary Organizational Affiliation, namely that in addition to “At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC)”, there is also the option to select “At-Large Community”

ALAC


  • No objections to the suggestion.   Seems fair to include that.


a.                   Suggestion

Corresponding Comments

Whether it should be possible for respondents who choose to, to have their name published in the summary report.

Jeff Neuman (during GNSO Council February meeting)   


Manju Chen

a.                   Agree

b.                   disagree

when there are a defined number of members in a WG, letting people choose to have their names published risks revealing the identities of those who don’t. 

Susan Payne 

a.                   agree

b.                   disagree

b) I can see pros and cons of disclosing names, but I tend to agree with Manju’s comments above.  Unwillingness to go on the record and/or concerns about retaliation may discourage frank feedback if the respondent is concerned about the disclosure of their identity


Discussion:

  • Group members generally agree.
  • Could say that people can include names if only everyone opts in.  But we seldom if ever have 100 percent participation.
  • We can accomplish this in other ways.
  • Staff will remove the redlines related to this.


3. Review of the attached updated recommendations report:

Next Steps:

  • The only new changes to the Recommendations Report would be relating to the public comment and link to the discussion table.
  • Staff to send the final draft of the report to the group for review.
  • Tied to changes recommended by the SOI TF – send all changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures to the Council at the same time, either January or February 2023.
  • Once approved by the GNSO Council the new version of the Procedures will be published.


ACTION ITEM: Staff to send the final draft of the Recommendations Report to the group for review.

4. AOB: None.

  • No labels