NomCom review implementation

[Elsa S]

Farzaneh,

Thank you very much for the efforts on this. Nomcom should definitely have
fundamental changes to reflect all stakeholders in this community (minority
or majority, we’re all stakeholders). I personally witnessed the amount of
meetings held with Nomcom and the efforts you and other NCSG members put
into this.

I’d be happy to help keeping the ball rolling even if, as u said, the ball
is in their court now. So please don’t hesitate to get in touch if any
support is needed.

Also looking forward to seeing how the NPOC issue might turn out.
Interesting that you went through the ombudsman Raoul.. keep us posted?

Best,

Elsa
—

On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 8:16 AM Raoul Plommer <plommer at gmail.com> wrote:

> I took the missing NPOC seat in NomCom to the Ombudsman and he thinks it's
> an obvious fairness issue. I'm very much looking forward to, how the case
> has progressed by Kobe.
>
> -Raoul
>
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 at 17:49, Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Farzaneh,
>> I know that the NCSG did participate but as you've written it is the
>> minority voice that vanishes within the majority.
>> What my message was about how to make the minority vote have an impact
>> could be done in different ways.
>> That is why I've written there is a need to strategize such inputs at the
>> different stages.
>> Hoping I got my point across this time.
>> Nadira
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 17:38 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Nadira
>>>
>>> Thank you. Sorry I didn't mean to support the notion that it is up to
>>> community to fix it. Obviously, it is not. When unfairness is towards a
>>> small minority, obviously the larger community won't fix it.  This is
>>> actually an issue that I paid direct attention to and made sure with the
>>> help of others we provided comments not to later on be told you did not
>>> participate hence did nothing changed.
>>>
>>> We took surveys, submitted all the public comments we could, had
>>> separate meetings with the chair. It was not fixed. And it was not because
>>> not because we didn't participate. It is because ICANN's structure is
>>> fundamentally unfair.
>>>
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 2:29 AM Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Farzaneh and all,
>>>> I was a member on the NomCom review party and continued on to the
>>>> feasibility community that produced the last report.
>>>> On my personal capacity, I can only reiterate what you highlight on the
>>>> last paragraph, that it is up to the community to fix it. Unfortunately,
>>>> the community input through out the process starting from the interviews,
>>>> survey, public comments, review sessions during ICANN meetings need to have
>>>> a stronger quantity and quality contributions to make the changes possible.
>>>> For an example during the review committee on ICANN meeting less than
>>>> handfull were presence in such session, that is why the chairs did a road
>>>> show during the following ICANN meeting.
>>>> There is a need to strategize the community input to have a stronger
>>>> impact.
>>>> Best,
>>>> Nadira
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 06:25 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear NCSG
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to update you on NomCom review. as you know we are
>>>>> underrepresented on NomCom and hope that could be fixed with NomCom review.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was the NCSG chair, we put forward the concerns we had about
>>>>> the noncommercial under-representation at NomCom ( we also have an
>>>>> effective member of IPT) . They told us within 6 months they are going to
>>>>> have the implementation plan team and then going to provide remedies for
>>>>> imbalance.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, as it turns out their  remedies have placebo effects.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Of course, they support fixing under representation of
>>>>> ccertain groups  oon NomCom but:  They have to change the bylaws to give
>>>>> us  the equal rights (only us, no one else in this situation)
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Changes will happen in less than 20 months. well I guess that is
>>>>> better than never.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3.Then we have:
>>>>> "Once the implementation team agrees how to ‘rebalance’ the
>>>>> NomCom, all bodies that appoint members to the NomCom
>>>>> need to agree before the changes can be implemented.  "
>>>>>
>>>>> good luck  to us if ALL bodies have to "agree" we will never get a
>>>>> balanced representation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I thank everyone who fought for this. G Sadowsky, a then ICANN board
>>>>> said that NCSG underrepresentation could be fixed but depended on the
>>>>> community to fix it and not the Board. WEll. We did all we could to be
>>>>> effective during the review. Ball is in their court.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Source:
>>>>> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/nomcom2-ipt-review-faiip-14dec18-en.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpRMFpqWTJNVGRtWW1FMCIsInQiOiI1eXBcL1VzSGNKXC9DR3M1c0FDWUhCUktDbUZxN0h1XC9qVWNWc2ZXcm5oRHlwS1c1UEFQWEJMNU9EWVd1YkhXbkpHMkM0aDN3VDlOQnJac05xY2t5ZHFWbTB0SklTXC9oaDJqK1lab2g1N0ZjbU16XC9qczZSU1Q1MGtOY2dERXBwajM3In0%3D
>>>>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/nomcom2-ipt-review-faiip-14dec18-en.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpRMFpqWTJNVGRtWW1FMCIsInQiOiI1eXBcL1VzSGNKXC9DR3M1c0FDWUhCUktDbUZxN0h1XC9qVWNWc2ZXcm5oRHlwS1c1UEFQWEJMNU9EWVd1YkhXbkpHMkM0aDN3VDlOQnJac05xY2t5ZHFWbTB0SklTXC9oaDJqK1lab2g1N0ZjbU16XC9qczZSU1Q1MGtOY2dERXBwajM3In0%3D>
>>>>> p.39
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>>
>>>> --
--

Elsa Saade
Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20190126/ca66b340/attachment.htm>