
29:29
Please review ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en

29:59
no

30:57
I am new. On last year but no meetings.

32:46
Good morning from Kingston to all. Apologies for the late join

33:13
See: https://community.icann.org/display/GSSC/GAC+Liaison+-+2020

33:55
We have reported wiki temporary maintenance and it is a work in progress to getting it fixed.

34:00
Thanks Terri!

35:54
Julf, I’m not able to raise my hand, but I did want to mention something in response to Maxim

38:25
+1 to Marie's compliment to Julf

38:31
+1

39:40
that's what zoom sessions are here for :)

40:38
only to punishment sessions?

40:44
:)

43:31
interesting, so basically "you" need "the network"

43:40
thanks

44:26
(obvisouly we don't want to overly focus on the current situation, hopefully this will change maybe something to bear in mind though)

46:34
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=OFikUjTbv3tn4wK_2B5Sra1TjWONWOqEjhYGYC_2BU3aTgNrg3IzRvxbJMTj5KZ0p6pr

49:10
hand up

49:25
Agree with Maxim.

49:59
we will have to process individual nominations

50:48
I had asked for a question to be placed in the survey to ask if candidate had SG/C support

51:44
Carlton first

54:44
no problem

54:45
hand up

54:47
nope

55:13
No applications have been received

55:17
no problem, but the communication needs to come out this week, preferrably before midnight

55:35
at least one application would be nice

55:44
Repeat call with a simple clarifying cover mail, Maxim?

56:08
@Marie +1

56:31
something like 'Please send your endorsement in the form of email in addition of the application sent by the candidate'

57:11
@Emily yes, we should allow all contenders but endorsed candidates should be noted

59:52
I think it is ok

01:00:29
Languages?

01:00:31
The instructions should instruct individual candidates to seek their SG/C endorsement, yes?

01:01:36
@Sam yes. But also point out that endorsement is not a pre-requisite for candidacy

01:02:08
I am not sure it is a valid reason

01:02:28
it would help thought

01:02:32
Not an absolute Maxim - just a benefit

01:02:55
@Marie, yes, language skills are always premium for engaging in "political" discussions so yes, I think this is a good one to add.

01:03:40
That's it exactly Carlton!

01:04:26
+1 Rafik, that what's I meant

01:04:32
maybe just something to bear in mind when we review the candidates

01:04:34
in the beginning

01:04:37
not a prerequisite

01:04:41
@Rafik, noted. Valid point.

01:05:17
Understood! Just thought it fitted in bullet one on the screen.

01:06:52
Just a note that the call for volunteers does not say that SG/Cs need to submit only a single applicant

01:07:07
and also doesn’t say that by submitting an application it is providing a formal endorsement

01:07:47
Understood

01:07:55
We will relay this to Council leadership

01:08:44
I would also suggest that based on the way the liaison work has evolved and with Julf's recall of his experience, the "political' engagements are the most fruitful for real intelligence. I think language skills would be a plus. Maybe we can look at that in context of reviewing the quals for this specific liaison at some point?

01:09:33
I love these calls! Very business like! Thanks all.

01:09:36
Thanks and good by