Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, what have we got? We’ve got action items. That’s always a good thing to look at - action items from the 18th of October. What did we say we would do, guys? And did we do it all? Where are the action items, come on, hurry up little action items. There we go, finally. Steam driven computer. Some of these have been covered off in the ALAC, the GAC and ALAC working collaboratively on recommendation six still needs to be open.
At the moment there is correspondence going between Chuck and myself, and I’ve proposed to Chuck that GNSO meet with the GAC this time, and ALAC does not meet with the GAC this time, perhaps the schedule in Cartagena might allow us to find some mutual time where ALAC and the GAC can in fact, discuss more on recommendation six. That hasn’t been finalized yet, but depending on the results of that, I’ll approach Heather directly for what will need to be an informal inter-relationship, if it’s going to be in the Cartagena schedule, because we’re pretty packed, and this isn’t a cycle meeting where we would be formally meeting with the GAC. Any questions on that, other than it’s still a work in progress?
If not, next couple go to staff, and the first one we have discussed as well, which is the F12 budget, the note is pending, as Heidi told us. We wait with baited breath for the note, but I would expect the Executive Committee and the members of Work Team C would be the appropriate people to be involved in a community call. Why we need to name who they are is a bit beyond me, though. Heidi, you can explain that to us as you go through your action items with staff.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, to begin on that point, my understanding Cheryl, as you, as chair, will be getting the official invitation, and then you will be requested to indicate who you would like to be on the At-Large call that will be discussing this.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, which is why I’ve got wry amusement on this, because you know, we’re not terribly restrictive on community briefing calls, are we?
Heidi Ullrich: Generally not, but I think for this one, it would be primarily, and I have indicated this, it would be primarily the ALAC sub-committee on finance and budget and the members of the Work Team C who will be discussing this.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I’m happy with that outcome, I just find it odd that we have to allocate people as opposed to our more open format.
Heidi Ullrich: My understanding, again this may have changed, from when we had a meeting on this, that the initial call will be for the ones who are the key players in this, and then in later November we will have a broader At-Large call for everyone.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ah, okay. Well, that’s not clear, obviously, until we get the note. So let’s look excitedly forward to getting said note.
Heidi Ullrich: It should be this week. I know that I’ve been telling you that for the last two or three weeks, I know.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, I’m just going “Yep, okay, fine.” I’ll believe it when I see it. I don’t know why Sebastien is having problems getting into the chat room. The chat rooms have been really flaky for me. It was fine during the JAS call, but the APRALO one and the one during the ALAC meeting, I was not able to stay active in at all.
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, what we can do on that, and maybe this one as well, is just close the current ones and then just start new ones.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, I think we might have to, and that might make a difference in Sebastien being able to get in, as well.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. I will make an action item of that, and Cheryl, also on the issue of the AT, I am unable to give you power to be host. It’s a thing that I normally do, and it’s not even allowing me the option of upgrading you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well goody. I’m back to flaky. There we are. All right. On to the --
Sebastien Bachollet: Something – may I say something about the way the website is working? When I click on the Adobe chat room, my windows with the ExCom meeting is going away, and that’s awful. That’s happened very often in this new area, in this new system, and I think you need to open windows when you click somewhere. If not, we are lost, I am lost.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sebastien, that is absolutely the case. It is a formal request that has been outstanding to be fixed for – now how long, Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: Um, sorry. Could you repeat that?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The open link in new window request, I put that in for a formal request for how long?
Heidi Ullrich: I believe last week.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, at least. We’re talking at least seven, possibly up to ten days, Sebastien. Hopefully, IT will fix it.
Heidi Ullrich: That was done on Wednesday, Cheryl. I passed it on, officially, on Thursday, and there we are.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. It is, as you’re hearing, Heidi, extremely frustrating for people. So we still need to ride that one on the list of things that still need to be done. I’d put that relatively high.
Heidi Ullrich: I will put that on again.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s all right, I don’t need to be on their Christmas card list, not a problem. I agree, Sebastien, it’s beyond annoying. Okay. Back to action items, Heidi.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, so I think, Cheryl, that we’ve covered the one on the fact to retrieve language in the ExCom meeting? That was the mid month ExCom meeting, and we’ve yet to do that. Staff has got announcement to the RALOs traditional comments on the rec six, and yes, we’ve done that. That’s completed. The one for Carlton I’m unable to answer. Carlton to look at details of public participation committee webinar and write comments. I have not seen anything on that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Just on that, Heidi, action items from now, that needs to be carried over, but from the discussion and agenda item we had in the ALAC meeting, Carlton needs to also follow up on each of the allocated Work Groups, for all of them that are closing in November. A couple for the tech, and this one, so I think there just needs to be a bundle of those, for us to get drafting back soon.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. And then the next one is that Cheryl and Heidi are to work backward on – from announcing new ALAC officers, so basically, yes we have completed that. We announced the schedule for the ALAC officer elections has been posted, and we’ll discuss on today’s ALAC call.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And that’s all in keeping with the rules of procedure, now sorry, Sebastien, just coming to your chat in the ExCom, you were quoting Evan. Was this a side chat with Evan, or is it something I need in the Adobe room?
Sebastien Bachollet: It’s something I just see in the ALAC chat room, an action between Evan and Alan, and I understand the question on Evan, but I don’t get the answer from Alan, and I see some contradiction between this answer and what I saw on the schedule.
Alan Greenberg: My answer was wrong.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It’s that simple, I was going to say “Alan’s wrong”, yes. So don’t worry. What’s in the schedule is in keeping with the rules of procedure.
Alan Greenberg: It does mean that the ALAC may not have any officers for some period of time, hopefully not long, but that is the case.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s correct. But I would think that some of those will be casual vacancies, others won’t be.
Alan Greenberg: In this case, since the chair stays as an ALAC member, the chair is still the chair until the new chair is elected.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s right.
Alan Greenberg: A vice chair, for instance, in my case, I won’t be on the ALAC, so I’m not the vice chair. Now, in the case of the chair leaving the ALAC, it’s a more awkward transition, but that’s our rules.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: One of the things, looking at rules, I’d like to discuss – we might just bring up under any other business, but I think we should spend some time at our mid-month meeting in preparation for Cartagena, where we have an opportunity of the old and the new blending together, and some wisdom being passed on to the new kids in camp, I’d like to spend some time informally, if nothing else, looking at rules of procedure. Not actually getting into substantial matters, but looking at the need for some changes and some modifications. We can get to that later in the agenda.
Alan Greenberg: As part of my former job, I’ve actually started drafting that sort of thing, so it may be useful.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s great. Thanks, Alan.
Sebastien Bachollet: If we can go into this any other business, I have one other point.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We’re not doing any other business yet.
Sebastien Bachollet: But it is on what you say, and I would like to discuss it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, go ahead.
Sebastien Bachollet: Length of the – sorry – how long time we elected of the ALAC member it is for two years, and I would like to suggest that we go for three years, and that’s some relationship with what would happen within the noncom, then we need to – I would like to discuss this issue, some time.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, we’ll take that on notice then. It involves changing memorandums of understanding and bylaws from the regions, as well as the nomcom, so it probably needs to be batted across to the appropriate Work Team. Seth, what Work Team would be the right one for that? Is it Work Team A?
Seth Greene: Cheryl, can you hear me?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, I can.
Seth Greene: Yes, I imagine that would be Work Team A, probably.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, that’s my gut reaction. But Seth, just make sure you kind of grab that issue as a placeholder, so it doesn’t fall through the cracks.
Alan Greenberg: It also requires ICANN bylaw changes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, it requires huge rebuilds. Serious rebuilds. But if they’re looking at two year, one of the recommendations from the ALAC improvement implementation is the matter of appointment for two years for the role of chair. Now, in my view, anything that happens to a chair probably should happen to other roles as well, but then you need to look at the advantages of things being staggered, there’s already at least one member – the leader actually, of Work Team A thinks that 12 months is probably more than enough, because you want to be able to get rid of people at regular intervals. So there’s a whole lot of work to be done on that case. Alan, last one goes to you.
Alan Greenberg: I don’t have it in front of me, so tell me what it says, and I’ll respond to it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It says, but we fixed it anyway, Alan to review ALAC rules and circulate comments concerning who proper electorate is to vote on new ALAC officers.
Alan Greenberg: I didn’t, until I just saw that, at which point I reviewed the rules, and realized my answer to Evan on our chat was wrong.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So it’s done. Well done. Nicely done, Alan.
Alan Greenberg: I hadn’t realized I had volunteered for that, but I did it anyway. But thank you to whoever put that note together, who got it right, instead of what I would have said.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It is my pleasure to serve, as you well know. Heidi, will we confess that the original schedule didn’t take into that rule until I caught it.
Heidi Ullrich: I give that to you, Cheryl. That was a good catch. You caught the (inaudible 0:13:32).
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, not a problem. Now, where are we up to? Okay, PAD. Well, there’s not a lot more we can do than we’ve done in the ALAC meeting.
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, can we go back? We have the action items from today’s ALAC meeting. If everyone refreshes, they’re there.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, having not refreshed – there we go. That’s good. Now I’ll refresh. And let’s jump into those. Thanks, Heidi, that’s all very quick and prompt. Well done. I give you people five minutes, and look what you’ll do. All right. Okay we all got to those now, we should all have – did everyone refresh them now?
Heidi Ullrich: I’ll put them in the ExCom chat as well.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alan, are you not at a computer that you can see these?
Alan Greenberg: I am now, I just wasn’t at that moment.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, because I was going to say I would just read them to the record if you like. Okay, first one falls on us. Continue to communicate with the GNSO to Cross Constituency Work Group, blah blah blah. That we’ve already dealt with, it just is a work in progress. It also is a work in progress that while we’re thinking about it, we probably need to make a particular point about the benefits of Cross Community and Cross Constituency Work Group actions, when we respond to the ATRTs recommendations.
Particularly some of what will come out in the Berkman report. What we have is the situation where community, and indeed, lead influences in government, for example the US government believing that the new and very successful Cross Community Work Groups that have borne out to deal with particular issues, such as recommendation #6 and JAS, are a really, really good thing; and, of course, the Board pointing out that they don’t have any place formally, unless they are created by Board resolution, and therefore can be ignored at the whim of the Board.
I think we probably need to make sure as an Advisory Committee that we pick up on those issues and we push very hard to make sure that in our accountability and transparency review outcomes, we see that a prioritization, or ranking, or formalization of what happens with output from bits of the community that have got together are dealt with in a different way, but formally rather than informally, which is what the Chairman of the Board tells us happens, in the Board’s deliberations.
To quote Peter Dengate Thrush, at the ATRT meeting, “The Board looks at things with different rating, but there is no formalization.” So they’re interested to know what Cheryl says, and he did say “What Cheryl says” because she speaks to the ALAC. Now, that just shows a huge lack of understanding of the processes that we go through, and a serious misinterpretation of what a piece of formal At-Large Advisory Committee advice is. So that needs to be fixed, so we want to take up more than just recommendation six and the JAS stuff, as well.
The rest look like staff, up until the TLG --
Alan Greenberg: Cheryl, it’s worth pointing out that that is the outgoing Board chair speaking.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, yes. It is. But it’s scary that the rest of the Board (inaudible 0:18:02) with that sort of attitude.
Alan Greenberg: I wouldn’t presume that they aren’t.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, you know even from our own --
Alan Greenberg: For those who don’t know, Peter has not been renamed as a ccNSO Board member.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, more importantly, the coup was successful, and I hope those who watch the subtleties of coups are wryly amused that the nominators for Peter’s replacement to the ICANN Board were the country from whence he came.
Alan Greenberg: Well, it wasn’t lost on some of us.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Good. Okay. So that action item goes on. So the forecast stuff – are we picking up on all of these Heidi? None of these need to be owned by us, other than the next one, which is the TLG review one. We need to own that. It says ExCom and Adam, but Alan, you seem to have particular views which I guess were at variance to some that were being discussed at the ALAC.
Alan Greenberg: I don’t have any good solutions. I identified the problems, I’m not sure what recommendations we make.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Identifying problems is a start. So if you pin Adam down to get a few words together, that would be good.
Alan Greenberg: I will make a note to try to do that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And it’ll be now, and AI out of this meeting, then that we get legal to look at the requirements for incoming members to be named to the secretariat one month in advance.
Alan Greenberg: I haven’t checked the bylaws with regard to the interim position, but in general, to all positions, I believe that is a requirement. So I think Adam is right, there may well be a need. I’m not 100% sure of a specific clause in the Board resolution to cover that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And if that’s the case, we need to come to it quickly.
Heidi Ullrich: As soon as Sam comes online, I will indicate that to her. The Board meeting is actually tonight, at CDT time, so yeah, that’s urgent. I will let her know.
Alan Greenberg: Tonight? I thought it was the 28th?
Heidi Ullrich: It is, but it’s an early UTC, so it’s actually late tonight.
Alan Greenberg: Today’s only the 26th here. I think. It’s early Thursday morning.
Heidi Ullrich: 27th, sorry. I’m a day ahead, day behind.
Alan Greenberg: Okay. Heidi, did I copy staff on the note on the suggested wording to cover the retro-activity of the approvals? The note I sent to Vanda and the ExCom? I sent it by individual mail; did I send it to staff, too?
Heidi Ullrich: I don’t recognize that, no.
Alan Greenberg: Okay, sorry. I’ll forward a copy immediately.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, that should probably go to Sam as well.
Alan Greenberg: Because Vanda is supposed to raise it, but that may be rather late, so you may want to forward it, and I’ll forward that and I’ll do something regarding the one month lead time, also.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, while you’re doing that, can you just give Heidi a thumbnail on the rationale and the why, so when she’s briefing Sam, as soon as Sam comes in --
Alan Greenberg: Well, I’ll send it immediately, but the rationale is that ever since we announced the call for applicants for the SOIs for the At-Large Board member, there were people who were saying, ‘there are no bylaws, any process you are following now is not valid, and the process you cannot initiate the process until the bylaws exist.’
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. But we do have a note from the general counsel that there’s things in the bylaws, or --
Alan Greenberg: Heidi, I recognize that, but a note from the general counsel in a private email or a private note is not going to change someone outside, who has a vested interest in challenging the election process overall, from challenging it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: What Alan is suggesting is a change in wording.
Alan Greenberg: I’m suggesting that a ‘whereas’ acknowledging that the process is ongoing, when the bylaws are approved, might circumvent that.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay.
Alan Greenberg: I’ll send you that note as soon as I stop talking and put the phone down. Okay?
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, thank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Just an assistant point, which if it goes well while Sam’s looking at this other issue, it could be perhaps put into a couple of whereas’s. Okay. Is there any additional action item?
Heidi Ullrich: Just one more that Alan alerted me to, and I contacted Evan about that. Alan has resigned, or he resigned from the ABSdt some time ago, so there’s an opening the NORALO slot, two slots, with the ABSdt. I will go ahead and send a note out to the NORALO list as soon as this call is over, but in the meantime, we are going to go forward with that Doodle, just in the interest of time.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep, absolutely. Okay. Anything else on action items? In which case, we can’t do very much with the PAD, other than raise the action item with Carlton, which we have done. And the one for the TLG drafting, which we have done. There’s nothing else crept out at us, so let’s move on to our agreement on agendas and the Cartagena meeting. Guys, the Cartagena meeting schedule is, as Heidi described to everyone, really, really full, and that’s okay, but I am a little concerned about a 20 to 30 minute slot paying pattycake with Adam. I’m sorry, I do understand and I think it’s really good, as we have before, having a nomcom come to our room and to hear from the rank and file, and Adam is only doing what has been done before, Alan, it’s not that this is new. It may be that you’ve been in the GNSO room when it has happened, but nomcom has been in our room before.
Alan Greenberg: I’m aware of that, the tone has been different, but that’s why.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, my question is when on earth are we going to try and fit this in? Recognizing that they also want a formal meeting on the Friday, which is going to affect our schedule, a lot. So, gentlemen? Suggestions?
Sebastien Bachollet: On Saturday. Ha ha ha ha ha.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I don’t know that any of us are still going to be there on the Saturday.
Sebastien Bachollet: No, no – it’s just – I am sorry to put that once again, but I am very, very disappointed that we don’t have the whole team on Saturday. With all the work that we have to do with the new people coming, with the team we need to discuss and so on and so forth, but we need to find time, and we have the nights, and extend the meeting and we find time, but it’s important to have that given to the nomcom.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So you’re talking about the 11th of December?
Sebastien Bachollet: I am talking to both dates. It’s important --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, well nomcom aren’t there till the end, so that’s why I was thinking it would be the 11th of December.
Sebastien Bachollet: No, it was my – sorry, my joking, even if it’s not totally a joke, I really think that we must start our meeting on Saturday, with the people coming before, because we have a lot to do before the ICANN meeting, itself, to prepare. But we will have also some clarity to do. And then I think we need to, maybe we need to extend the length of the meeting. I know it’s not very convenient for a large group, but just to allow 20 minutes more on Saturday, for – on Sunday, sorry. Because he doesn’t want on Tuesdays, and on the real specific – I guess it’s Sunday, somewhere on Sunday.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excepting Adam was specifically requesting Tuesday, because that’s when his people will be around.
Sebastien Bachollet: Okay, it was misunderstanding and reverse. But --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, tell me if I’ve got it wrong.
Sebastien Bachollet: No, just to let you know, I was with Adam before the ALAC meeting, as I am in his city, and we had a chat. But maybe I was not listening what he said today because we discussed that prior. But --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: He specified to the constituency that he said “they will be doing their run around with the ACs and SOs on constituency day, the Tuesday.
Sebastien Bachollet: Okay. I may be missed something. Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, what – where can we try and squeeze this in? Suggestions, gentlemen? We have a small amount of time, if we run to the 12:30 point instead of the 12:00 point on the policy discussion part 2. Is the AFRALO meeting with sandwiches on their lap, or what, Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: That is the aim, yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So in which case we could run to – we could give Adam 12:00 to 12:30 on policy discussion part 2, and the rest of us go to lunch, and the AFRALO people won’t starve to death during their meeting.
Alan Greenberg: Cheryl, if he’s doing things on constituency day, that doesn’t mean he has to talk to us then. If the relevant people are they by Tuesday, then they will also be there Wednesday and Thursday.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That doesn’t help us (inaudible 0:29:43).
Alan Greenberg: No, no, I’m just saying that it doesn’t have to be that day. We can try to fit it in some other day.
Heidi Ullrich: I would suggest that we go with what Cheryl is saying. I think that would be the best time. The Wednesday is extremely busy as well.
Alan Greenberg: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, Heidi, can we get back to Adam now, from the ExCom and say “While you’re getting your schedule organized, here is a proposed time, how about you slot us in from 12:00 to 12:30 on the 7th of December.”
Heidi Ullrich: Yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So then we wait for the additional feedback on the Friday agenda.
Sebastien Bachollet: My understanding about Friday – if we tell him it’s this time, we can also make a proposal and I hope that they will buy it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The Friday was a formal with the full nomcom meeting.
Sebastien Bachollet: Yes, but I guess that we’ll have the meeting of the afternoon, and if we say we want from 3:00 to 3:30 or whatever, it’s – we can also manage ourselves. If we say that now, we may be the first one to take a slot.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Recognizing our meeting running from 4:00, yes. I did say that our meeting started at 4:00. He indicated that they haven’t done their agenda at all for Friday yet, but he thought that the fact that they do have to fit in all of us, and that they – by all of us, I mean all the ACs, Board, etc., etc., and that the Board meeting may run late, because of all the thank you’s, etc., etc., yeah. I mean, the only thing is we can halt our Executive Committee proceedings and gather together at a particular time. I’m kind of less concerned about the formal Friday one, but we may as well, as long as it works around Kevin darling, and for us. Now, Heidi, I’m assuming it would probably – because Kevin would be dialed in for part of the Friday Board meeting as well?
Heidi Ullrich: If he does not attend Cartagena, he would participate remotely in the Wednesday meeting with the Work Team C and the ALAC Subcommittee on Finance and Budget as well, if you so wished, to dial in remotely to the ExCom on Friday, as well.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So I guess we need to wonder, and we may not know until we actually get to Cartagena and see what happens with the Work Team C meeting, if we need to have Kevin again in our agenda on the Friday ExCom meeting. That might clear up a bit of time for us to deal with nomcom and other things, anyway. Okay, well that’s the only open part at the moment. Are there any holes in the agenda? Are there any additions in the agenda that any of you have noted or need to put? We need to shuffle here in the main agenda items, as they become available. They’re really not going to be available until the 12th and the 13th, Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: I’m sorry? Oh, the final agenda. I believe that we’re actually having an internal meeting on the 12th, and then after that -- that was to review the final schedule, and at that point it will be posted. Let me double check.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I’m just wondering if we can unofficially and temporarily start putting in potentials so we know where open slots might be for any formal meetings that come up.
Heidi Ullrich: I’m working with meeting staff on that. It’s a little bit different this year. Normally we would have seen various versions already, and we would see as the meeting confirmation forms come in, we would see regularly updated schedules, but I don’t think they are planning on doing that, officially, internally this year. But I can try to have an unofficial.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, I think anything we can do along those lines is the better as far as I’m concerned. What’s everyone else’s view?
Male: (inaudible 0:34:48).
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I was going to say was anyone else still on the call with me? (laughter)
Sebastien Bachollet: Yes, we are with you, and we are with you. We agree, it’s why we don’t say nothing.
Alan Greenberg: I’m here, but I’m mute, and I didn’t have anything negative to say, so I didn’t say anything.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It’s okay. It’s just a quarter to four in the morning, I’ve been with you all for some time, and I was beginning to wonder if I was talking to myself and Heidi. Okay, so anything else that we need to do on item three, Heidi? Is there anything that you need to raise with us?
Heidi Ullrich: If we can just indicate which people, which staff people you would like, particularly on Tuesday, so we can begin inviting those people. And then eventually, Cheryl, we would need to perhaps just have a call with you on going through the agenda. The meeting confirmation forms are requesting as detailed agendas as possible, as well. So you’ll see that a lot of the agendas, there’s nothing in them yet. So, for example, under the policy discussion part 1, currently we have a staff briefing with Patrick Jones on SSR. I’m assuming that you would also like someone to speak on the new gTLDs?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hello? Let’s get some feedback. Gentlemen? What do you want on these agendas?
Sebastien Bachollet: I guess we need to figure out what are the main topics and where we will get something different that will not be said during the ICANN meeting in other general meeting or – and I think that gTLD itself will be covered, and I’m not sure that we need to have a specific presentation on that. We need to have time to discuss that issue, because of the Working Groups on that matter will be still going on, and where we can try to fix the position of At-Large on that. How to fix will be great, but I’m not sure that we need the formal presentation that will be done somewhere else.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I do agree with you, actually, Sebastien. I think anything that is going to be done to death in the main agenda items doesn’t need to be briefed --
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, if I could add to that. Currently the Monday schedule, the main meetings, indicate after the welcome ceremony every meeting will be on the new gTLDs. Sebastien is correct. The first ones will be – well, there will be three of them. One will be basically a new gTLDs one. One will be something more – newer, the latest information, and then the third one will be on information for potential applicants.
Sebastien Bachollet: If we are looking for staff coming to us, I would like – I would express my (inaudible 0:38:07) we then can come, but there’s some new ones and announced yesterday, it would be interesting to meet with us on participation, for example.
Heidi Ullrich: Sebastian, you’re speaking about Felice?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Felicia.
Heidi Ullrich: Yeah, we did actually ask her about that, and I think given that this will be her first meeting and that she’s in charge of not only the remote participation but also the big public forum on public participation, I think her time will be limited. The idea was that we could have her meet the At-Large community informally, during a social event. Would that be okay with you? Or would you still like to request a formal session with her?
Sebastien Bachollet: I prefer – I would like to have a formal session with her. I think that public participation, we are at the heart of that, and I could understand that she will have a lot to do, but we will have too. But that’s one when if not no new stuff, and we will do our job.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi, I wonder how busy she actually will be on constituency day?
Heidi Ullrich: Again, given her remote participation issues, I think she will be quite busy, but I’m happy to make the request.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think we can be flexible, releasing that if things have gone pear shaped, you know, she’ll have to pop in when she’s available, but let’s see if there’s a placeholder at least that we can try and get. Probably then, in the beginning of the part two? My reason for that is that most of the issues should have been shaken out at the beginning of the room set up, remote participation at the start of the day? And she’ll either be sinking or swimming by 10:30? So maybe look at an 11:00, 11:30, 12:00 possible slot.
Heidi Ullrich: Sorry, Cheryl. That was for Felice 11:30 to 12:00? Did you say?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, something in that line, yes. Though I’m not sure it needs to be a full half hour, 15 minutes of glory is probably enough. Hello, here I am, here’s my concept.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, I’ll put 11:30 to 11:45 right now.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So Dave or Alan, any particular briefings you want us to ask for?
Alan Greenberg: I’m afraid nothing that comes to mind at the moment. I will keep an eye on it for the next little while to see if anything is coming up, but at this point, no.
Dave Kissoondoyal: Except for new stuff on compliance, yes, I don’t see any other --
Alan Greenberg: If they’re there, they’re not going to be real integrated by that time.
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, would you like to meet with Pam Little? On compliance?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think probably having Pam into it would be worthwhile. It picks up the ongoing RAA work, and a number of other issues, including matters that were raised in the VI discussions, and it probably sets us up for some things that may come to the table when we discuss our mutual areas of interest with industry on the Thursday.
Alan Greenberg: Actually, in retrospect, I agree. Pam and the new Senior Director, if there is someone named by them, and at the meeting. That’s good.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, bring Pam, and she can bring in anybody else as needs be. So should we do that in more of the morning in the session one? so we basically get two staff briefings done in the part one, and then we can get into substantial policy discussion and work until a cameo appearance from (inaudible 0:42:44).
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, could I make a suggestion, to make it maybe the RAA and bring Margie in to talk about latest updates to the amendments, and then bring Pam in for compliance issues?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, that’s the whole of part one gone, okay.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, so we have that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So all staff briefings happen in session one, with the exception of any meet and greet that might happen with our new public participation person. And if she can’t make it on the Tuesday, there may be an opportunity for her, public participation to pop in and wave hello during the Sunday, when things aren’t quite so full on either – we’ll just see. Okay. What else Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: Just a quick review of the Sunday session, and to begin with, we will have the At-Large outreach/inreach --this is, again, suggested. So we’ll have the outreach/inreach promoting ICANN, we have confirmations from Barbara Clay as well as Scott Pinzon to start that day. I think that will be really interesting. They have a lot of updates, they are really moving forward with a lot of outreach issues, and they have also some good suggestions for the new gTLDs process, and the inclusion of At-Large members on that. We were then thinking that we would have Mandy Carver speak on global partnerships, immediately afterwards, and then open up for discussion. Any thoughts on that?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s fine by me. Is Alan okay for moderating at that point? What’s the GNSO requirements?
Alan Greenberg: There’s been nothing published yet. It’s normally heavy duty meetings, and typically in recent years, the gTLDs have been in the afternoon, but I don’t know how it’s going to work this time.
Heidi Ullrich: We have, tentatively right now, GNSO meeting it looks like again, 900 to 1630.
Alan Greenberg: Yeah, but it’s a subdivision within it that I haven’t seen anything yet.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, it’s a working session. I see two working sessions on Sunday for the GNSO. One is 900 to 1630 and one is 900 to 1800, and then there’s a Board meeting with the GNSO from 1600 to 1800.
Alan Greenberg: Yeah, the question is when is the gTLDs discussion, which will be a critical one, and I don’t know that yet.
Heidi Ullrich: I can find that out, if you’d like.
Alan Greenberg: Well, it may not be firm at this point.
Heidi Ullrich: Yeah.
Alan Greenberg: Let’s keep on playing by ear, and we’ll surely have to end up doing some juggling, but --
Gisella: Excuse me here, are we talking about the new gTLDs sessions in the GNSO Sunday session?
Alan Greenberg: Yes.
Gisella: Okay, that needs to be confirmed – it’s currently down for 1030 to 1300, so we’re waiting on Kurt Pritz to confirm that, so I wouldn’t put anything definite in yet, but we’re looking at a morning session as opposed to an afternoon session.
Alan Greenberg: Okay, thank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Which means that it might be a challenge for Alan to moderate between 9:00 and 11:00. He might be able to moderate between 9:00 and 10:30, which is when coffee break’s on, but that’s okay. Alright.
Alan Greenberg: That’s interesting. We have a session going to 1100, which overlaps the coffee break.
Heidi Ullrich: Well, because I know how much you like to work during the coffee break. So my assumption was that we would bring the coffee to you, so you could continue working, and in addition, given the contracts and the prices for catering, there’s a very good chance that we will be able to have a catered lunch during the Sunday session as well.
Alan Greenberg: Excellent.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It certainly will be. Okay. Gisella, or Heidi, if you’re looking at draft schedules, can you tell me? Because I haven’t got it in front of me, when the ATRT’s meeting with the Board of Directors on Sunday?
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, that is – actually, okay the Board that will be 1400 to 1500.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: 14 to 1500?
Heidi Ullrich: Well, I see two. It’s – I see one at looks like 8:30 or 9:00 to 10:00 and then another one 2:00 to 3:00. You have two?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, you’ll probably find the 9:00 to 10:00 is our own prep meeting --
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, it just says ATRT Board audience. Both of them say the same.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well, let’s assume I’ll be out of the room on both of those times, anyway.
Gisella: Cheryl, it’s Gisella. What I’m trying to do is just see with Alice already if she’s able to give me any indication, and also I’ll then put the meeting 10:00 to 3:00 on your schedule.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Terrific, because we, as far as I know, we have an ATRT meeting, and then an ATRT with Board meeting. So the two times makes sense, I’m just not sure why the nomenclature is the same. That’ll be great. Thanks, Gisella, I appreciate that. It just means as we’re juggling with Alan and other moderations, we know where our flexibility is.
Gisella: Okay, and also, whatever tentative meetings we’ve got now, the At-Large meetings and any other ones that I can assist with, I’ll put them in the At-Large calendar, but they’ll all just be tentative, if that will help you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s good, and I think it will help others as well.
Gisella: By the end of the week, okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Terrific. Okay, thank you. Back to you Heidi, I think we got to coffee break.
Heidi Ullrich: We’re making progress. Okay, so if you’re going to be out of the room until about 3:00, then I’d like that we have, currently, David Olive down for 3:00, and I’m also going to put down Akrim, the new COO might join with David at that time.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can we make that after the coffee break? The COO?
Heidi Ullrich: So that would be at 1600 then.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. It’s just if it’s 1600 it’s going to be safer, because you know what happens with meetings. They run over.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Then we also currently have at 1600 to 1730, which we can move up then, is the At-Large improvements. Now, given that we are going to have several Work Teams meeting individually, as well as a follow up or a feedback for the last 30 minutes of the wrap up session, do you still need or would you still like to have a session on At-Large improvements? And if so, does it need to be 90 minutes?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: My answer is yes to the session, and no to the 90 minutes.
Heidi Ullrich: 60 minutes then?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That would make sense, 45 to 60 minutes makes perfect sense.
Heidi Ullrich: Sebastien, are you okay with moderating that?
Sebastien Bachollet: You know, we’ll have Cheryl ask me at check in what she wants me to do, and I will do it.
Heidi Ullrich: okay, well I would suggest that we put that at 3:00 then, or maybe even at 2:00.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, I’d rather it from 2:00 on, I think that makes better sense, Heidi. And that way, Sebastien, you just take it from the reconvening people back in the room on.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, so for the lunch, if we do have it catered, do you want to have a session at that time? And if so, should it be a bit of a lighter session? Or what would you like to discuss during lunch?
Sebastien Bachollet: I think we are – if I am looking at the proper schedule, we are missing one important part, as we have a new members, we need to have some buildings, and the lunch will be at this time to try to help with presentation of people and allowing this type of action. If we can have more time to do that will be great, especially if we can keep some time at the end of the day. But lunch need to be, for us only, and to allow our attention (inaudible 0:52:24)
Heidi Ullrich: Sebastien, would you also like to have the new director perhaps say some opening words during that lunch?
Sebastien Bachollet: I don’t talk about the director at all, not my cup of tea, then --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So I’ll answer. Yes.
Sebastien Bachollet: Thank you, Cheryl.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, I’ll note that for during lunch, and I think that would be actually give us more reason to have a catered lunch, if we could have a formal event.
Alan Greenberg: I was going to suggest a catered breakfast for the director one. I’m serious. There’s nothing else running in to it, it’s an important session that I don’t think should be crammed in with six other things. You might want to consider it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Which day, Alan?
Alan Greenberg: I’m talking about on the Sunday, but it could be on another day. It actually could be any of the days. And in fact, if it’s someone who is not normally at our meetings, Sunday may be a particularly bad day, because they may not be there then. If they’re just coming in for the start of the formal ICANN meeting.
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, could I suggest that we do still have the informal lunch, where people are having a team building exercise, and then have a more formal session later in the week for the new director?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, that’s – if the new director is on the ground, I will be included in the informal getting to know you and team building exercise over 1230 to 1400. Gisella, can we make sure I’m in the room at that time? In other words, don’t take any other double bookings?
Gisella: Not the double -- I’m sorry?
Alan Greenberg: I was going to say, double bookings? I thought it was the single ones that were hurting you.
(crosstalk and laughter)
Alan Greenberg: Sorry, Gisella. I don’t think we caught that.
Gisella: Double bookings would make my life easier, triple bookings should stop.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: She hardly raises an eyebrow at the double booking. It’s the triple ones --
Alan Greenberg: It turns out you were both saying the same thing without hearing each other.
Gisella: Exactly. I’ll get that time with Heidi, Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks. Okay, anything else for the Sunday, Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: Part of the last few minutes would be the allocation of meeting reports.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.
Heidi Ullrich: So you still have extra time slots, but we can discuss those a little bit later.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And extra time rarely ends up being there on the end of the day.
Sebastien Bachollet: I just checked with Adam, if I can read what he answered to my question, “I think Tuesday would be better. Not sure when we’re going and (inaudible 0:55:47) will arrive, but whenever is best for ALAC, we are open.”
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Great, then we will send him an affirmative response when Heidi sends a note to him with either offering him a 12:00 to 12:30 slot on Tuesday. Good. Okay.
Heidi Ullrich: But we still have a slot between 1100 and 1230 on Sunday.
Alan Greenberg: Let’s keep it open for the next little while. We’re not really good at planning this far ahead of time carefully. Remembering all the important things. So some slack at this point.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Something will suddenly hit, I’m sure.
Sebastien Bachollet: and if it’s a three hour team building it’s okay. We will do some work, even if it’s not written to work with somebody else.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I wondered when you might be allocating face to face time for creation and drafting of opinions to go into the accountability and transparency Review Team’s recommendations. It really is important that we have broad and considered opinions integrated into the ALAC view on these things. There will be a public workshop, but I think we need to have ALAC and At-Large time devoted to it as well. That is a possibility for the Sunday, even though I may not be in the room, the public comment documentation will be out at that time.
Alan Greenberg: When will it be coming out?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We’re expecting it – it’s all gone to translation now, so in a perfect world, early to mid next week.
Alan Greenberg: Okay. It would be really useful if we could start a discussion on email and I know it’s not something we do, but --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: All I’m saying is that may take up some Sunday time, or it may end up taking time on our Tuesday. But take time, it must.
Heidi Ullrich: But Cheryl, if we move the At-Large improvements to the morning, and then have you – you’re going to be there at 1400 or so, no, you’re not. Okay, never mind. Sorry.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It was a rush of blood to the head, Heidi.
Sebastien Bachollet: Good try, good try.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It worked well for a moment. Okay.
Sebastien Bachollet: Something raise to my mind not about this specifically, but do you think, Cheryl, as member of this review team it could be interesting to have an open meeting with the other members supported by the At-Large or ALAC to the other Review Teams to have a joint discussion on how the Review Teams are working and what the ALAC representatives, or whatever, people could do? Just an idea.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: My immediate reaction is probably not. Reason is that the ATRT, the currently convened ATRT will be retracting into final report writing mode at this point in time.
Sebastien Bachollet: It’s not to discuss too much of content, just to discuss – okay. Maybe just you discuss with the three of them and that will be okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sorry, Sebastien, what was it you were proposing?
Alan Greenberg: I think he’s talking about a candid discussion on Review Teams and the dynamics and the things they should be aware of and that kind of stuff. I think that’s probably best held as a private meeting, not a public one.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Right, fair enough. What might be interesting is to carve out some time in our agenda to look at the other Review Teams that will be running at that time.
Sebastien Bachollet: Yes. And if we cannot make sense with the members it could be interesting at least with the At-Large supported one. To have Alejandro and Olivier and the guy from Germany.
Alan Greenberg: Do you know when they are going to be at the meeting, though?
Sebastien Bachollet: They will not be.
Heidi Ullrich: Alejandro will likely be, I would assume.
Sebastien Bachollet: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So if it’s going to be remote input, we could perhaps look at that in the Sunday, if not we revert to the Tuesday again. So we just have to shuffle between the two there. Perhaps we could check and see if Alejandro is going to be available, and what days, if either of those days and times would be more humane for remote participation.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, we can do that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. What else do you have for us, Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: Then I’m going to go through just a quick --
Sebastien Bachollet: Just one point. I already told you, Heidi, but the NORALO meeting in Spanish become a LACRALO meeting.
Heidi Ullrich: Ah, I see. Okay. Also, let’s get down to – we have a lot of RALO meetings, they will discuss their agendas. Tijani wants to have the AFRALO/AFRICann joint meeting via follow up from the Brussels meeting. The first Working Group for that meeting will be either this week or next week. We have the meeting, the ALAC and the Board meeting tentatively that is going to be a lunch. So what would you like to have as the item for discussion?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, it probably, the flavor of the month will be the gTLDs, I would have thought. But what does everyone else think? Okay. Well, that was --
Sebastien Bachollet: -- after the new members and the new chair, and so on and so forth, and the relationship with the committee. How they serve and --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: If that’s the case, then you’re looking at ATRT issues.
Sebastien Bachollet: Maybe, yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, my guess is it will be one or other or both of those topics as table topics, Heidi.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. So I’m going to say ATRT. I didn’t quite get what Sebastien said after that. I heard the introduction of new Board members, but I didn’t hear --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Relationship with the community, etc., etc. It all really falls under accountability and transparency.
Alan Greenberg: Sorry, I hit the wrong key and dropped off. I’m back now. But I missed the last few minutes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, it was a matter of what possible table topics would we be looking at for the Board lunch, and I suggested perhaps it might end up something in the new gTLDs spectrum, because that will be flavor of the month at the whole meeting, and Sebastien raised a couple of issues that really come up under ATRT, in other words, new Board members, relationship with the community, etc. etc.,
Alan Greenberg: Between those two, it should be interesting.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s what – either/or or both as topics for the table will be fine.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, excellent. I’ll put both of those. I’ll put the ATRT and then put two sub-headings underneath that. Okay? And then the meeting with the registrars? I think that’s immediately after that session then. I’m sorry, two hours later. No, sorry, it is immediately after that. So which sections would you like, or which discussion items for the meeting with the registrars? Currently we have, in Brussels we had an exploration of our roles in ICANN, working toward better understanding, trust and collaboration.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We should probably continue that, and look specifically at operational rights documents and other matters coming out of RAA. Discussions, vertical integration, (inaudible 1:06:03) let’s also ask --
Alan Greenberg: Do we know if Garth is going to be there?
Heidi Ullrich: I do not know that yet.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I don’t know. Let’s also ask, I cannot think of that man’s name.
Heidi Ullrich: Is he staff, or is he --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The constituency lead.
Heidi Ullrich: Mason.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you. I couldn’t get past M. Right, yes. Let’s ask Mason for suggestions as well. We shouldn’t do all the bloody work.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: For example, some of the issues that have come out of pednir, in terms of better equipping registrants, with educational information and understanding of their rights and responsibilities. Those sorts of things we could discuss. What do you think, Alan?
Alan Greenberg: I don’t know. I guess I prefer something substantive to be discussed, with real outcomes as opposed to more of a patting each other on the shoulders. But I’m really at a loss to know --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Throw a few topics on the table and we’ll discuss it then. But right now we’re establishing relationships as much as anything else.
Alan Greenberg: Let me thing about that one.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. But we also need to get Mason involved in the topic setting.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Cheryl, I will send a note this week to you, and Rosemary, and Aubrey, etc., about the consumer meeting.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.
Heidi Ullrich: And then we have, following the LACRALO meeting, we have the Work Team B meeting scheduled. That’s going to be an informal one, early in the morning. We’re trying to get like a catered, or light catered breakfast for that one as well - the ALAC regional leadership wrap-up session on Thursday. We currently have the event linking ALAC business, regional leaders feedback, and then the At-Large improvement co chairs feedback.
Alan Greenberg: From the point of view of the GNSO liaison, it would be really good if it wasn’t the same time as the GNSO wrap up. Last time they overlapped. I know it may not be possible, but if you could try.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Gisella and Heidi probably have some idea on that already.
Heidi Ullrich: I see nothing on Thursday.
Alan Greenberg: Well, there will be a GNSO wrap up on Thursday.
Gisella: One second, GNSO wrap up – GNSO council wrap up session is looking like a working lunch on Thursday, 12:30 to 2:00.
Alan Greenberg: Okay, perfect.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, good.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, so we’ll keep that agenda as is right now, and then ALAC business can be defined closer to the event?
Alan Greenberg: Yep.
Heidi Ullrich: And then immediately following that, I believe, we have one hour on the community review for the confluence, and we’re going to have Carol Cornell as well as Roman Kulky on that. Sorry, my cat is – so we’re going to have that session, again that would be defined by the community closer to the event when we know what the At-Large Wiki looks like at that time.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.
Heidi Ullrich: And then Thursday, from 1800 to 1900, Cheryl, do you wish to talk to that? the meeting at the chair’s request?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Not at this stage. Just keeping that time free.
Heidi Ullrich: It’s an option. But that’s a very important meeting, and we’re going to require everyone to be there. And then the – request everyone to be there---and then we have, after the Board meeting on Friday, we have the ALAC ExCom meeting between 1600 and 1800.
Alan Greenberg: So that Chair’s request meeting is immediately preceding the dinner?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And we do need to find a place and space in the not too far to go old town, I gather.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, Old Town is about ten minutes from the conference center, so it will be a pleasant walk. Unless it’s raining, of course.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Anything else on the Cartagena meeting?
Alan Greenberg: I do note that all of our meetings are in the Pegasus room. It’s appropriate that we be in a room associated with the wind god.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I have no problem with that imagery at all.
Heidi Ullrich: It is on the ground floor, and it is immediately outside or next to the main foyer, which has tall windows looking out to the water and the Old Town. It will be a really nice walk to get there.
Sebastien Bachollet: I hope we don’t see that during the whole day.
Heidi Ullrich: I haven’t seen the view from the actual room. But immediately outside of the room, you will go through double doors into the main foyer, which has the big windows.
Sebastien Bachollet: So you will have to take us inside the room.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi, do we know how far away from the venue probably accommodation is likely to be?
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, it’s going to be approximately 15 minutes shuttle drive, and everyone will be in the same hotel.
Alan Greenberg: What do you mean by everyone?
Heidi Ullrich: All of the members who are receiving travel support.
Alan Greenberg: All ALAC members? At-Large?
Heidi Ullrich: Yes. Well, everyone in GNSO, all the various communities will be in one hotel.
Alan Greenberg: Including the Board?
Heidi Ullrich: I believe so, yes.
Alan Greenberg: Oh, wow.
Sebastien Bachollet: Don’t worry, Alan. They will be at the top floor.
Alan Greenberg: Yes, but if they deign to be in the same lobby as us, we’re ahead of the game.
Sebastien Bachollet: No, they will have a special lobby, don’t worry. (laughter)
Alan Greenberg: That happened before.
Heidi Ullrich: Just a little heads up for San Francisco, my understanding is again everyone will be in the same hotel, and it’s a beautiful hotel in a major square in San Francisco.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, there’s not that many of those, Heidi. You’ve narrowed it down considerably.
Alan Greenberg: Does that mean we’re at the Hilton?
Heidi Ullrich: Not at the Hilton in San Francisco, no. But it’s a beautiful hotel.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I must say the single venue is a good idea.
Heidi Ullrich: I’m not sure if the conference center in San Francisco is in the hotel, but actually I think it is.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We’ve done that before, and it worked very, very well.
Heidi Ullrich: Actually, I think in San Francisco it is, because I know the contract will specify that, so yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Good. excellent. Good to hear it. so that’s it for our Cartagena schedule for today’s meeting?
Alan Greenberg: Then can we go back to bylaws? I put a note in the Skype chat that it looks like the one month period only applies on regular appointments, and does not apply on the first six month appointment, but it’s worth double checking with Sam, but the working, as you can see, that I put into the Skype chat, seems to imply that we have to give notice to the Secretary, but there’s no indication of a lead time on it. So I believe that was a red herring.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, Alan, that’s worth double checking then. Thanks.
Alan Greenberg: No, when he said it, I said “Oh my God, did we not consider this?” but it looks like the bylaws factored that in, but why don’t you double check with Sam anyway? But it doesn’t look like a problem.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Good. Good, good, good. Okay. Anything else then? Before we – did Vanda send us anything for today’s meeting? I don’t think she did. Did she Heidi?
Heidi Ullrich: No, she sent her liaison report, but besides that, no.
Alan Greenberg: She said she might be in by the end of the meeting, but I guess she isn’t.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, never mind. Okay, well, we know the most important things from our perspective on the next Board meeting includes the bylaw changes, but one thing I think we need to be fairly careful about is the current difference between what Board members believe is coming out of their meetings and what we can interpret by what does come out of their meetings. And the difference between intent and how it can be interpreted.
Alan Greenberg: I think the – I don’t know, I have no reason to know, but I suspect that even as late as two days before the meeting, the Board agenda still said this is not a Board meeting. I think they decided on the fly that the community was expecting output from the process. I mean, I’m assuming they decided they had to name the nomcom chair, because that’s a timing issue.
But other than that, I think they decided on the fly that the community was expecting something and the only real way they could give anything to the community was via motions. So they were crafted on the fly and not very well. So I’m sure each of the motions reflected the belief of whoever crafted it, but it may not have reflected the belief of the Board, and it disappoints me that there weren’t more abstentions on some of those. Because that’s what I would have expected as the result of the motion not reflecting the belief of some of the members, but there weren’t many. There were some.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But not – yeah.
Alan Greenberg: And we still don’t know who they were, I believe, because that only comes out in the final document. Is it lunch time yet?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I don’t know about you, but it’s damn near my breakfast time. Is there anything else?
Sebastien Bachollet: It’s the middle of the night. It’s 2 and 13 minutes in the morning. no problem.
Alan Greenberg: Well, then it’s snack time.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (inaudible) Is there any other business that we need to look at in this call?
Alan Greenberg: Only to ask Sebastien, is this holiday or is this work.
Sebastien Bachollet: I try to mix both, but it’s more work than holiday, but I try to have both.
Heidi Ullrich: So Sebastien, when you’re in Washington, are you going to the Washington office?
Sebastien Bachollet: Ah, I don’t know, because it will be a weekend and then my conference, and it may be hard to get done. I will send you where you can send me information, but the other solution is to send documents to the San Francisco office.
Heidi Ullrich: (crosstalk) D.C. office --
Sebastien Bachollet: Then I will send you the information to send it to the place where I will be. It will be I guess easier, and if not I will contact and see if I can go to the office in Washington.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, perfect. rhank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, anything else before we wrap up? In which case, Dave needs dinner, Alan needs lunch, I desperately need coffee and the less than thirty minutes between this call and the next to do one or two minor things. I guess that’s it for now, and we’ll have our normal mid month meeting, there’s a couple of things that need to go on that agenda, and a couple of placeholders that need to be highlighted. Seth, we’ve got the group C Work Team today. One of the things that they’re doing is a SWOT analysis. How is the dripsy back from the Work Teams going to happen with the ALAC and the ALAC Ex Com on things that might need to be looked at?
Seth Greene: I think after the analysis is done and it’s decided how it will be used to implement their recommendations, they plan on having a fairly brief report that they’re going to send back to you folks.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Because one thing that does bother me slightly about what I’m starting to see in some of the Work Teams is this empowerment exercise may be misleading some of the Work Team leaders to believe that this is an opportunity to revisit recommendations, when it’s an implementation exercise.
Seth Greene: Yes, I think you’re right about that.
Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, Seth and I have discussed that, that we need to bring the focus back here to implementation.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. But that bothers me and I certainly wanted the ExCom to be aware of it.
Seth Greene: On today’s agenda, Cheryl, I started – as I’m going to do on all of the agendas – putting in an agenda item of starting focus on what sub text in the recommendation should we prioritize for handling next. And then that will turn into a status review of all the sub texts at the end of each Work Team meeting. I hoping that keeps the focus on the implementation.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Good to hear. Thank you, Seth. Okay, thank you one, thank you all, thank you linemen, thank you ball boys. Oh, I will be connected, but only vaguely connected for the next 24 to 48 hours, Joan’s got some medical appointments that I’m going to be involved with, you know what they’re like. They’re always ratty connections if at all possible. So pick up anything and run with it as required if there’s anything urgent. I will be making most of the calls, and I’ll have dial get organized. Okay, bye for now.
End of Transcript
