[NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague

[Dev Anand Teelucksingh]

Via the ICANN's website on April 30 2012 :
http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30apr12-en.htm
(for some reason, the heading does not match the intent of the announcement)

Dev Anand Teelucksingh
Trinidad and Tobago Computer Society, http://ttcsweb.org/






On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Eduardo Diaz
<eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com> wrote:
> When and how was this announced?
>
> -ed
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Bret Fausett <bfausett at internet.law.pro>wrote:
>
>> I am very troubled by the decision to remove the public meeting. As I see
>> it, this presents several issues for the community:
>>
>> 1) The Board meeting typically closes a cycle of community discussion with
>> a vote/resolution on some issue, and these end-of-meeting Board resolutions
>> are important. The deadline of closing an issue at a public meeting also
>> keeps the Board on track. Do they still intend to meet and close issues?
>> This needs to happen.
>>
>> 2) The public meetings became a bit of orchestrated theater over the
>> years, but I still believe they served the purpose of showing the Board's
>> professionalism in addressing and resolving difficult issues. Last June's
>> meeting on New TLDs is the most recent example of this. Take a look at this
>> picture from Singapore that ICANN features on its website:
>> http://www.icann.org/en/about That's worth a thousand words. Note the
>> people in the foreground using their camera phones to capture the moment.
>> We're losing that.
>>
>> 3) Closing the monthly meetings while leaving these end-of-session
>> meetings open was something of a compromise reached between a prior Board
>> and the ICANN community many years ago. I am concerned that the Board
>> decided to change the status quo without any notice and comment.
>>
>> 4) As always, ICANN is under scrutiny with the IANA bid still to be
>> resolved and issues of transparency at the forefront of some of those
>> discussions. The way this was handled (was there a Board resolution?
>> Chair's decision?) only makes the optics worse. I can't seem to find any
>> background on how this decision was made, or why it was made.
>>
>>       Bret
>> ------
>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>>
>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>> ------
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or
> subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named
> addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use,
> disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by
> mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------