Council Member replacement

[Olivier Kouami]

Interesting debate here..I too am living in 2 Countries now but in the same
geographical region.
Olevie

Le jeu. 19 déc. 2019 à 12:56, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja> a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
> Very much agree with both David’s and Tomslin’s perspectives below, noting
> that this discussion is really academic, anyway.
>
> As I pointed out earlier on this thread, there are existing requirements
> for diversity in Council representation detailed in ICANN’s governing
> documents, as well as those of the GNSO and NCSG. Wether we agree with
> them, or not, the NCSG has an obligation to fulfill those diversity
> requirements, which are not limited to geographic diversity, but other
> types of diversity as well.
>
> …, and again…, the NCSG has never really had a problem with these
> diversity rules. We’re easily the most diverse Stakeholder Group in the
> GNSO, which has always been reflected in the diversity of our elected
> officers. We have, however, imo consistently had problems with the quality
> of our Council representation. That’s something that needs more work.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Dec 18, 2019, at 9:06 PM, Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I absolutely agree with this thinking David.
> We need more diversity at the bottom of the process and our best at the
> top. If there were a good number at the bottom, we won't have a problem
> finding strong candidates, meeting the diversity requirements we hope to
> achieve.
>
> Happy holidays!
> Tomslin
>
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 20:01, David Cake <dave at davecake.net> wrote:
>
>> I think James is very astute on this point.
>>
>> We need people to be involved in PDPs and policy work that represent a
>> really diverse geographical range, so we capture a really wide range of
>> perspectives. All of the geographical divisions have a huge range of
>> diversity within them - my own region, APAC, includes India, China,
>> Malaysia, Indonesia, a wide range of pacific islands and more - as well as
>> my own nation, Australia, and its close neighbour New Zealand. We could put
>> up six councillors just from APAC and still represent a diverse range of
>> viewpoints in other ways, or a balanced geographical representation and
>> still have other big diversity issues. But the council just manages policy,
>> and is a good job for people who already are experienced in policy and want
>> to help manage the process.
>>
>> But council level is not right solution for regional diversity. Council
>> mostly only deals with the policy process, not the policy detail, and it at
>> the detail level that so many regional differences are important. We want
>> six of our best, experienced, policy experts in council. We need
>> representation from all regions in PDPs and policy work, and then it will
>> be easy to have choose six that represent a broad range of regions. It is
>> better to have a mild imbalance in regional representation (2 councillors
>> is not enough to truly represent the diversity of ANY region, and geography
>> is just a single diversity factor, we also want gender balance, a range of
>> skills, a range of sectors, etc) than to have councillors without enough
>> policy experience. But we really need diversity at the policy level, to
>> make sure regional issues (like, eg, so many IDN issues, or national legal
>> differences) are represented in the policy process.
>>
>> So, don’t apply for council just in the hopes of building regional
>> diversity. Jump into the policy processes.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On 18 Dec 2019, at 12:02 am, James Gannon <lists at ICANN.GURU> wrote:
>>
>> more active members from the African region who are participating and
>> contributing to PDPs and policy work in general.
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20191219/12461dcf/attachment.htm>