Re: [council] Agenda for LA meetings

[Richard Lindsay <richard@interq.ad.jp>]

From a purely logical standpoint, I would think the meeting
order  would be as Don describes:

1.  Constituencies
2.  GA
3.  Names Council
4.  ICANN Board

The time allocated should depend on the agenda, not the
other way around (i.e., hey we have all this time, lets talk
forever.)  I believe there is more than enough time before
the ICANN Board meeting to have all the DNSO related meetings
in a suitable order.

I still believe though that an informal meeting amongst Names
Council members to get to know each other, and perhaps to
review what the Berkman Center has advised (if we agree to
go this course) would be very beneficial.  If not we will
definitely see a repeat of Santiago...

Richard

"Chicoine, Caroline" wrote:

> I agree with Don, but I am a little concerned about extending the GA for
> one full day.  IMHO, I think that after a couple of hours, the
> discussion starting going around in circles and we starting hearing from
> the same people, and in fact it was when we realized that time was
> running out that people started coming together on the WGA issue.  I
> would like to crystallize the agenda for the GA before deciding to
> expand it to a whole day.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Telage, Don [mailto:dont@netsol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 1:47 PM
> To: 'Elisabeth PORTENEUVE'; council@dnso.org; mclaughlin@pobox.com
> Subject: RE: [council] Agenda for LA meetings
>
> It seems odd to me that the DNSO meets after the Board meeting. I
> propose
> that those dates be reversed.  Output from the DNSO would seem to be
> important as input to the Board.   Does anyone else feel the same?  Don
> Telage
>

--
_/_/_/interQ Incorporated
_/_/_/System Division
_/_/_/Director and General Manager
_/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay