
52:11
oh happy 2020

52:20
James =)

52:25
I though James was joining remote

52:43
Thanks James!

52:51
'snakes in rafters' is either a rock band or a bad movie....

53:25
Can you all hear us? Just want to confirm the audio is ok.

53:28
yes

53:37
audio is fine

54:55
@Julf no I live in bushland with a snake (and all beastie friendly way of life

56:20
CLO: are the snakes friendly too?

56:33
yes overly so at times

56:57
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agenda+23+January+2020

57:01
wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/8ACJBw

57:45
@CLO 'Overly friendly'...indeed! :-)

58:16
Wifi here is flaky so a lot of are probably being disconnected + reconnecting etc

59:20
We are working to try and get someone off-site to help with screen share. Stay tuned.

59:39
I am fine looking at the wiki page agenda :)

01:01:07
That someone is Ariel. Thanks for stepping in at the last second Ariel!

01:01:14
Project List: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/projects-list-13jan20-en.pdf

01:01:16
No problem!

01:01:35
Never the same without you, Ariel!

01:01:50
Aww I miss you all

01:05:19
Action Item list: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items

01:12:27
congrats Amr and Julf!

01:12:31
And Carlton

01:12:32
Congratulation!

01:12:43
Thanks!

01:13:24
This is the addendum to the RPM PDP Charter: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-charter-addendum-09oct19-en.pdf

01:21:25
This is the latest: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-charter-addendum-09jan20-en.pdf

01:21:35
Hyperlinked to “revised draft” in the agenda

01:23:06
the voting is for 20th Jan version , https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-charter-addendum-09jan20-en.pdf

01:33:26
This is the project change request for RPM: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/review-rpm-gtlds-pdp-change-request-17jan20-en.pdf

01:44:07
Can’t see anything from John

01:45:16
We are meeting once a week for 1.5 hours long calls

01:48:00
Ok - can see that

01:54:17
Could we use this meeting transcript as a source of questions for RPM PDP Leadership?

01:56:16
Perhaps a new Índependant'Chair might be an option if all else fails

01:56:41
Michele, what O_o? You and Unparliamentary language? How could this be o_o.

01:56:43
so No Skin in the Game with the Admin Project Mx aspects of the PDP

01:57:12
if we use berry’s average calculations today, it was shared with me earlier today that so far, an average of 5 million dollars would have been spent on this WG

01:58:39
shared with us*

01:58:46
Cheryl - I like the idea of independent chair

01:59:05
Neutrality (and professionalism skill set of Chair(s) is an essential ingredient to success in any model of PDP IMO however so agree with your observations Keith/Michele

02:00:23
Bit for very different reasons from SubPro

02:00:26
@Cheryl - well put

02:00:30
I sincerely hope!!!

02:01:42
that last was not a response to your comment @John ;-) but thanks :-)

02:02:49
Might I venture that with better and more limited scoping and following Work PLans the timelines might be more realistic and less aspirational"

02:03:03
My question is very simple. Results Matter! So, can anyone tell me whether there is any indication that the work product from the WG would meet the objective[s] anticipated? And if we think they will not be met, would it take some courage to kill the process or in good faith allow the 4 months?

02:03:52
Another learning: we need to put the right questions in the charter. Experience from this WG is that unclear charter qs = months of toing & froing as to what the WG is actually supposed to do.

02:04:20
It should have been rechartered

02:04:25
But that horse has bolted

02:04:37
Very true @Marie so a combo of issues from multiple (can do better in future) sources has çaused'some of this snafu

02:06:11
Um, the chartering questions being admittedly substandard and/or not fit to purpose, is it the sense that the work output would then not meet anticipated objective[s]?

02:15:25
ALAC??

02:18:12
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200123_gnso_council_attend_the_dot_org_protest/

02:19:10
Great that would obviously be preferable

02:22:39
IDN Scoping Team Final Report: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/idn-scoping-team-final-report-17jan20-en.pdf

02:30:34
Thanks Edmon!

02:37:28
Draft response to the NomCom Review Implementation WG: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-council-response-nomcom-outreach-questions-17jan20-en.pdf

02:41:30
Also re deadline of the NCIRWG responses we have already received requests to extend by 2 weeks FYI :-)

02:42:23
Travel pilot: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/fy21-abr-travel-support-request-13jan20-en.pdf

02:42:39
SPS ABR request: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/fy21-abr-strategic-planning-session-request-13jan20-en.pdf

02:42:59
@cheryl but no extension for ATRT pcp :)?

02:45:41
The ABR pot is actually quite small to share ICANN wide

02:45:45
Yup

02:45:50
thanks all and bye !

02:45:50
thanks all

02:45:51
Thanks everyone Bye for now...

02:45:54
Thanks all for a nice first meeting

02:45:54
Thank you all!

02:45:55
Thank you and enjoy the SPS