<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
I could not support such a strategy: I do not believe the noncom
should be twisted to give the GNSO an advantage. I like that this
proposal removes a small bit of business' advantage in its continued
control of ICANN.. <br>
<br>
The Nomcom is supposed to support the wider community and should
include all ACSO on a equal footing. It should not be tilted toward
any one stakeholder group.<br>
<br>
And remember if we get more Nomcom seats for the GNSO they will be
for businesses, both contracted party businesses, and non contracted
party businesses. They will not be for academic and non commercial
interests.<br>
<br>
While I think they missed the opportunity to make the Nomcom
smaller, I do support the basis of the Board proposal.<br>
<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 17-Dec-14 14:56, Nicolas Adam wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5491DFD7.5080401@gmail.com" type="cite">:)
<br>
<br>
I'm thinking that supporting the letter while pursuing these
options, namely,
<br>
<br>
i) pushing for more GNSO reps on the board
<br>
ii) getting at least 4 votes on the NomCom for GNSO and less for
ccNSO
<br>
iii) barring getting 4 votes on the nomcom, getting an automatic
split for GNSO's 3 votes
<br>
<br>
is the move more likely to help us achieve anything in i, ii, and
iii.
<br>
<br>
But seriously Amr I would be happy with your way of doing if you'd
act otherwise. You've convinced me many times over that I'm happy
following you.
<br>
<br>
Nicolas
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 17/12/2014 2:47 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Dec 17, 2014, at 8:21 PM, Nicolas Adam
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nickolas.adam@GMAIL.COM"><nickolas.adam@GMAIL.COM></a> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">True, then we'd have a little (not much)
to bargain with.
<br>
<br>
Perhaps we should support the letter ;)
<br>
</blockquote>
Hahaha!! That’s precisely what I’m trying to avoid!! But I have
initiated this discussion with the knowledge that I am in a
minority opinion on this, and will grudgingly (just this once
:)) respect the wishes of others.
<br>
<br>
Thanks again.
<br>
<br>
Amr
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>