Re: [AC-COORD] Draft minutes: 1 August 2007 AC teleconference]
On 8/12/07, Son Tran <son@apnic.net> wrote:
Dear Martin
Many thanks for your feedback on the experience you had in the August telephone conference. We have contacted the service provider and expressed our concern about the service.
To help avoid future problems, we request that all of you wishing to be called by operator provide your phone number to the APNIC Secretariat no less than one day before the teleconference.
Regards
Son
Son, Please don't minimize our participation. If the call bridge provider is repeatedly preventing AC members from being able to participate, that's a serious problem. The problem witht he last call, in my case, was not with a last minute change, but the number the operator was provided with. It was wrong. It seemed apparent that you could have cared less since it took email to the AC list to get it corrected when asking the operator why an acknowledged participant was not on the call. Your response is unacceptable and I'd like to know what you plan to do to address problems with the conference bridge provider service keeping AC members from participating, both with your apparently non existent secretariat procedures, or, the call quality. Not hearing the call is the same as not participating. If the AC needs to resolve this administrative problem, please let me know and I will begin writing a procedure for you to use. Martin
Martin, The secretariat does have procedures and they have been described a number of times. In particular we have stressed that those who wish to be called need to submit their numbers 24 hours in advance. This is a requirement of the phone service operator; while we could possibly find an operator without this requirement, we also have had serious problems with quality of alternative systems, and it is a non-trivial exercise to change operators. This investment of time and effort is not warranted at this time in my opinion. I am very sorry that the wrong number was provided for you in the latest instance, and everyone here will do their utmost to ensure that such an error does not happen again. I need to ask you to reciprocate by following the established procedures for AC calls in future. I would further suggest that since toll-free numbers are provided in many countries, AC members could help to streamline the process by using those numbers rather than requesting to be called. I would go as far as to say that the Secretariat should not arrange callouts where toll-free numbers are provided, except in special circumstances. If there is anything else which is unclear, please let me know. Paul. --On 12 August 2007 8:28:55 PM -0400 Martin Hannigan <hannigan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/12/07, Son Tran <son@apnic.net> wrote:
Dear Martin
Many thanks for your feedback on the experience you had in the August telephone conference. We have contacted the service provider and expressed our concern about the service.
To help avoid future problems, we request that all of you wishing to be called by operator provide your phone number to the APNIC Secretariat no less than one day before the teleconference.
Regards
Son
Son,
Please don't minimize our participation. If the call bridge provider is repeatedly preventing AC members from being able to participate, that's a serious problem.
The problem witht he last call, in my case, was not with a last minute change, but the number the operator was provided with. It was wrong. It seemed apparent that you could have cared less since it took email to the AC list to get it corrected when asking the operator why an acknowledged participant was not on the call.
Your response is unacceptable and I'd like to know what you plan to do to address problems with the conference bridge provider service keeping AC members from participating, both with your apparently non existent secretariat procedures, or, the call quality. Not hearing the call is the same as not participating. If the AC needs to resolve this administrative problem, please let me know and I will begin writing a procedure for you to use.
Martin _______________________________________________ Aso-policy mailing list Aso-policy@aso.icann.org https://aso.icann.org/aso-lists/listinfo/aso-policy
________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg@apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
On 8/12/07, Paul Wilson <pwilson@apnic.net> wrote:
Martin,
The secretariat does have procedures and they have been described a number of times. In particular we have stressed that those who wish to be called need to submit their numbers 24 hours in advance. This is a requirement of the phone service operator; while we could possibly find an operator without this requirement, we also have had serious problems with quality of alternative systems, and it is a non-trivial exercise to change operators.
This investment of time and effort is not warranted at this time in my opinion.
I am very sorry that the wrong number was provided for you in the latest instance, and everyone here will do their utmost to ensure that such an error does not happen again. I need to ask you to reciprocate by following the established procedures for AC calls in future.
I'm sorry, Paul, but that's out of context. If you refer to the ASO AC minutes it's clear that this is not a new problem, nor a problem related to an individual. You'll also note that there are multiple complaints about the service over the last few quarters and complaints from people in almost all of the regions that the AC represents. The issue that has been highlighted is that of _interference with participation_. If I can actually get on future calls, and then if I can actually hear what's being said, I promise not to make motions to stop the calls and reschedule our work until we can actually hear everything that is taking place. I'm sad that you don't take the ASO AC as seriously as I do, as evidenced by your lack of interest noted in the first paragraph. In fact, it may have been easier to just deal with the problem than spend the last 3 hours figuring out how to respond. Best Regards, Martin Hannigan ASO AC Member, ARIN Region It would've taken you less time to re-subscribe to the prior conference service than writing this.
Martin I'm sorry that you feel that the Secretariat is not taking the issue seriously. The Secretariat would never condone interference with participation. We will investigate the issues that have been raised with the current teleconference provider. If you would like to pursue the issue, please feel free to raise it at the next teleconference. Donna On 13/08/2007, at 1:48 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
On 8/12/07, Paul Wilson <pwilson@apnic.net> wrote:
Martin,
The secretariat does have procedures and they have been described a number of times. In particular we have stressed that those who wish to be called need to submit their numbers 24 hours in advance. This is a requirement of the phone service operator; while we could possibly find an operator without this requirement, we also have had serious problems with quality of alternative systems, and it is a non-trivial exercise to change operators.
This investment of time and effort is not warranted at this time in my opinion.
I am very sorry that the wrong number was provided for you in the latest instance, and everyone here will do their utmost to ensure that such an error does not happen again. I need to ask you to reciprocate by following the established procedures for AC calls in future.
I'm sorry, Paul, but that's out of context. If you refer to the ASO AC minutes it's clear that this is not a new problem, nor a problem related to an individual. You'll also note that there are multiple complaints about the service over the last few quarters and complaints from people in almost all of the regions that the AC represents. The issue that has been highlighted is that of _interference with participation_.
If I can actually get on future calls, and then if I can actually hear what's being said, I promise not to make motions to stop the calls and reschedule our work until we can actually hear everything that is taking place.
I'm sad that you don't take the ASO AC as seriously as I do, as evidenced by your lack of interest noted in the first paragraph. In fact, it may have been easier to just deal with the problem than spend the last 3 hours figuring out how to respond.
Best Regards,
Martin Hannigan ASO AC Member, ARIN Region
It would've taken you less time to re-subscribe to the prior conference service than writing this. _______________________________________________ Aso-policy mailing list Aso-policy@aso.icann.org https://aso.icann.org/aso-lists/listinfo/aso-policy
On 8/13/07, Donna Mc Laren <donna@apnic.net> wrote:
Martin
I'm sorry that you feel that the Secretariat is not taking the issue seriously. The Secretariat would never condone interference with participation. We will investigate the issues that have been raised with the current teleconference provider. If you would like to pursue the issue, please feel free to raise it at the next teleconference.
The Secretariat does not seem to like the transparency of this discussion. It also seems obvious that the Secretariat is having difficulty grasping the core issue. The conference bridge and associated administrative failures are only a symptom. The attitude of the Secretariat towards the enabling of the ASO AC's participation is the cause. The continued deflection of responsibility is not helpful and I would appreciate it if you would take this issue, address it realistically by attempting to remove any roadblocks that may be present, and subsequently addressing this with a solution instead of the continued minimization of our participation. I think that the core problem has been amply demonstrated in this discussion and thank you fro your response and look forward to your solution, which I will report back on. Best Regards, Martin Hannigan ASO AC Member, ARIN Region
participants (3)
-
Donna Mc Laren -
Martin Hannigan -
Paul Wilson