<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">Hi Ed,</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">thanks for this, it will help us for the discussion in today call and what will be our position in the council call next week.</div><div class="gmail_extra">I want also to highlight that a selection process is coming soon with the whois/RDS RT which is an agenda item for GNSO call.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Best,</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Rafik<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2017-02-10 6:21 GMT+09:00 Edward Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net" target="_blank">egmorris1@toast.net</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-family:'Lucida Sans Unicode','Lucida Grande',Sans-Serif;font-size:14px"><div>Hi Rafik,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks for this. Two major issues:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>1. One is the usual Constituency versus Stakeholder Group debate.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Who should be on the Selection Committee? There was consensus that the GNSO Council Chairs and Vice Chairs should be on the Committee. Then we differed.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>One view, which was the majority, opined that each Constituency should be represented. This view was supported by Susan Kawaguchi of the BC and Heather Forrest of the IPC. Under this system the CSG would have 3 reps, the NCSG 2, the RySG and RrSG 1 each, along with the Council Chair and Vice Chairs. The reps themselves would be appointed by the Constituencies on the NCPH side. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>My view was we should honor the GNSO structure and have 1 rep from each of the Stakeholder Groups along with the leadership team. Under this system the CSG, NCSG, RySG and RrSg would each have 1 rep who would serve alongside the leadership team.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The full Council has been delegated to decide which option to chose.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The SSR was a learning experience for me. This was the most difficult and time consuming activity I've done at ICANN. Not to say I didn't value it - it probably fits my skill set better than other things I've done here and I'm happy with the outcome from a NCSG perspective - but I just don't see a large group being very effective doing the initial vetting. Everyone on the team needs to be committed to doing the substantial and detailed work and I believe that's more likely to happen with a smaller group.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>For reasons of equitable representation and the utility of smaller groups I certainly would encourage support for the SG option. In fact, I think it is absolutely essential from a NCSG perspective. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>2. The initial proposal made by Susan and myself included a rotation system for appointees. This consisted of two parts:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>1. For review teams, the top three endorsees should be from three separate SG's (assuming a sufficient number of applications), and</div>
<div> </div>
<div>2. For review teams, the SG that did not have candidate endorsed in the top three (which are guaranteed appointments) would, by right, have a candidate endorsed for the next DT in one of the top three places.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>This was changed by staff into a general diversity requirement and was approved by the Committee at a meeting with 40 per cent attendance. There was conversation about weakening the requirement somewhat in the previous meeting but I did not expect anything like this.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I believe this requirement to be fundamental and essential. NCSG candidates often have skill sets a bit different than others. In the SSR2 RT the GNSO endorsed James as a guaranteed SSR2 member and Naveed as someone we would propose for further consideration. If we strictly applied the skill set contained in the Call for Application neither would have been selected.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In fact, staff included neither of our candidates in their top seven ranking. Both, IMHO, would be excellent SSR2 members but James was perceived to lack specific desirable educational attributes and Naveed, a man with impeccable academic qualifications, had no direct experience in "corporate security".</div>
<div> </div>
<div>We're the NCSG. Many of our members lack corporate anything. If that, and other requirements favouring industry professionals, are going to be a strict requirements for other RT's and the SG rotation is eliminated our Members may have some difficulty being selected. I believe a strong rotation is in the interest of both the NCSG and the GNSO.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'll be very happy to talk about all of this on the call tomorrow. I believe in an inclusive GNSO, one that recognises the diversity of the SO and guarantees all a place at the table for all SG's on these important RT's. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Susan and I have agreed to meet in Reykjavik with the goal of jointly drafting language that would reinstate in some form the rotation concept, and posting it to the Council list prior to the Council meeting on the 16th, so the matter may be considered by the entire Council.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Kind Regards,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ed Morris</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
<div><span style="font-family:tahoma,arial,sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><b>From</b>: "Rafik Dammak" <<a href="mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com" target="_blank">rafik.dammak@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Sent</b>: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 11:54 AM<br>
<b>To</b>: "Edward Morris" <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net" target="_blank">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<b>Cc</b>: "ncsg-pc" <<a href="mailto:ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is" target="_blank">ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is</a>><br>
<b>Subject</b>: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Standing Selection Committee</span><div><div class="m_-6841756561543113790h5">
<div> </div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Dear Ed,</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"> </div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Thanks for sharing this and raising your concerns. I think the selection process is definitely a topic for discussion at the policy call.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">can you list quickly the concerns you have prior to the call? I think some changes are editorial but I saw that several paragraphs on page 6 and 7 were removed which are related to decision making.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"> </div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Best,</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"> </div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Rafik<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2017-02-07 13:20 GMT+09:00 Edward Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net" target="_blank">egmorris1@toast.net</a>></span>:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div>
<div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Hi everybody,</span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">I hope we can discuss this on our policy committee call later this week and in other meetings before our February 16th Council call.</span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">The Standing Selection Committee met tonight in reduced fashion: due to technical problems and conflicting commitments only two of the five team members attended the entire call. Changes, based upon staff recommendations, have been made to the initial proposal and I don't believe these changes are in the interest of the NCSG. Hopefully we'll have time to talk about things and come out with a common position going forward. </span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Overall I think this is a good proposal but we do have work to do on the full Council. I look forward to discussing things with everyone, particularly my fellow Councillors, on Friday.</span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Best,</span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Ed Morris </span><br>
</div>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone</div>
<div><br>
Begin forwarded message:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><b>From:</b> Susan Kawaguchi <<a href="mailto:susank@fb.com" target="_blank">susank@fb.com</a>><br>
<b>Date:</b> 7 February 2017 at 03:17:30 GMT<br>
<b>To:</b> GNSO Council List <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> <b>[council] Standing Selection Committee</b><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div class="m_-6841756561543113790m_1656364019136035454h5">
<div> </div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div class="m_-6841756561543113790m_1656364019136035454m_-3925872609957450893WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello All,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Please see the attached draft charter for the proposed Standing Selection Committee. This committee would be composed of councilors to select candidates for review teams and other positions.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We will discuss next week at the council meeting.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best regards,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Susan</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div> </div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div> </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>______________________________<wbr>_________________</span><br>
<span>council mailing list</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank">council@gnso.icann.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr>istinfo/council</a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
NCSG-PC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is" target="_blank">NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/ncsg-pc</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div></span>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>