NCSG Election Clarifications
Stephanie E Perrin
stephanie.perrin at MAIL.UTORONTO.CA
Tue Jun 2 11:38:35 EEST 2020
Thank you James. I re-sent the documents about the election which I
sent on April 24th. Please read that document, and if people have
constructive wording on how to improve it, without me having to write an
annotated description of the chapter, I will be happy to write it up and
pass it on to the next NCSG Chair in the package of documents I am
preparing.
To be frank, people need to focus on a few things:
* Those of us who are in the trenches volunteering hours of our time,
giving up earned revenue, and spending our own money on ICANN
participation are more willing to accept criticism from folks who
actually are with us in those trenches. Join us! Let's talk about
solutions.
* The Charter sections on elections is not perfect, but it was an
honest effort to solve really hard problems. We have 6 seats, 5
regions, and (so far) two genders to consider in our selection of
leaders. We had a discussion of inclusion of folks who do not
identify as either gender, but it did not result in charter
changes. We also need a balance of experienced hands who can share
knowledge and experience (not necessarily positions) and new
people. New people are often reluctant to run against old hands.
which contributes to our problem in getting new folks elected.
People need to participate a bit to understand what is involved in
leadership.
* Gender balance is important. Maintaining a positive and welcoming
environment is also essential, and will lead to great balance and
participation from all members.
* Bruna and I are focusing on leadership training. We believe that
will help bring more members into active participation.
* We are in the middle of the elections now. I will be happy to bring
forward a discussion of your/any requested Charter changes after the
elections, but we have really have to complete the present process.
Stephanie Perrin
On 2020-06-02 12:22 p.m., James Gannon wrote:
>
> With respect, this is not about Steph, this is not a new situation either.
>
> It’s about a fundamental lack of effort from people in reading the
> charter when they joined and jumping onto a bandwagon that they don’t
> even understand because they are unwilling to put in a minimal amount
> of effort reading our foundational documents.
>
> ---
>
> *James Gannon*
>
> *From: *Olivier Kouami <olivierkouami at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 2 June 2020 at 17:18
> *To: *James Gannon <lists at icann.guru>
> *Cc: *"NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu" <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
> *Subject: *Re: NCSG Election Clarifications
>
> Greetings all,
>
> Please, let's be kind and gentle with each other on this thread.
>
> We are facing a new situation and we all need to make understandable
> to all how to deal with such a situation.
>
> IMHO, Stephanie will not be elected but she'll be appointed to fill a
> lack of female, in this election.
>
> My 3 cents
>
> Olévié
>
> Le mar. 2 juin 2020 à 15:50, James Gannon <lists at icann.guru> a écrit :
>
> Well to be honest what has came out in the last few days is that
> the members who are unwilling to put in the hours and effort to
> further NCSG policy seemingly find time to raise issues with a 9
> year old charter that governs all of our membership.
>
> For those of us putting in hours and hours of work and expending
> considerable personal expense to do actual work for the NCSG, at
> least in my own case, its very frustrating to see people come out
> at this point and make criticism of those of us actually working
> for the SG and for the furtherance of NCSGs values in ICANN policy
> development.
>
> Maybe if more people actually put in the time and effort to work
> on ICANN policy instead of having NCSG listed in their bios on
> LinkedIn we would not be having this conversation as we would have
> a deeper bench of policymakers and influencers to fill our officer
> and policy roles.
>
> ---
>
> *James Gannon*
>
> *From: *"Vaibhav Aggarwal, Catalyst & Group CEO"
> <va at bladebrains.com <mailto:va at bladebrains.com>>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 2 June 2020 at 16:41
> *To: *James Gannon <lists at icann.guru>
> *Cc: *"NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>"
> <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
> *Subject: *Re: NCSG Election Clarifications
>
> Thanks for writing in James.
>
> I am not asking for an Expense Statement. Not to trivialize this -
> I am asking for a Written report of Who Did what ? If there are
> member from the group travelled - they represented the Group Right
> ? So the Group should have a Call on it - A Report should be
> published of the take aways, action items -
>
> Secondly - Every year there are “Vacancies filled” - What are they
> doing ? What is their report - What did they do ? How did the
> group further its Agenda ? Voice ? Et. etc.
>
> I hope you get what I am saying.
>
> As far as bringing in Amendments - Why should I be the one - If
> the group is interested to do it - Lets constitute a Task force -
> Let it be a Unanimous effort - We will do it like a PDP - and
> Bring about a proposal. And If the group want me to Spend time on
> it - Efforts - I will be happy to chair that - It could be a Sub
> Group - Like other SGs everywhere !! Everyone should be part of
> the process - Isn’t that one of the contentions emerging the past
> few days ??
>
> cheers
>
> -VA
>
> On Jun 2, 2020, at 8:33 PM, James Gannon <lists at icann.guru
> <mailto:lists at icann.guru>> wrote:
>
> Two points:
>
> All covered travelers are noted
> here:https://community.icann.org/display/trvlconstit/Travel+Report
>
> No other expenses are covered by ICANN for any officers or
> councilmembers, we fund all of the rest ourselves, often at
> great expense.
>
> And any member can start the charter amendment process, I look
> forward to seeing the amendment proposal from you in the
> coming weeks.
>
> ---
>
> *James Gannon*
>
> *From:*NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>> on behalf of "Vaibhav
> Aggarwal, Catalyst & Group CEO" <va at BLADEBRAINS.COM
> <mailto:va at BLADEBRAINS.COM>>
> *Reply to:*"Vaibhav Aggarwal, Catalyst & Group CEO"
> <va at BLADEBRAINS.COM <mailto:va at BLADEBRAINS.COM>>
> *Date:*Tuesday, 2 June 2020 at 15:43
> *To:*"NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>"
> <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
> *Subject:*Re: NCSG Election Clarifications
>
> *Who Said What : *
>
> To continue on this, It clearly means “We don’t care for
> Democracy” = In technical Words - Whoever pointed out that the
> role is Not Elected but Selected / Nominated - Elevated - is
> good.
>
> Take Example from the US Presidential forms. The Next in line
> is accordance to the Role they plat in the Manage of the
> Country - So does anywhere else. In all the forums - Either
> small or Big.
>
> To justify all the money extended, reports submitted etc.
> There is No Archive of A Report being Submitted by ANY EC or
> Former Chair or Councilor as to work delivered over the last
> few years. In fact, it should be right to say from the
> inception. We don’t see a time line or a collection of
> documents, works done - Yes there are “LIST ARCHIVES” but what
> is to be drawn on that ? Whenever, a office bearer debits
> office, a report should be submitted, a Traveller travels on
> Forum Expense either in part or Full, there should be a
> sharing of knowledge, Because in the GNSO community login -
> Confluence, there isn’t anything or there isn’t Much. What
> does that mean ?
>
> *The Constitution : *
>
> There are over 300 members (and Several More) Only 4 People is
> to be constituted ? And only 4-6-8 people decide how the
> functioning will be is it ? Thats governance ? WoW.
>
> The Bylaws cannot be constant - they have to evolve. For
> anything the group does, there should be a consensus building.
> Not a DikTat.
>
> *Adaptation & Purpose : *
>
> This discussion has become who says what - Who is right and
> who is wrong - who is supported by whom - but no body want to
> talk from a perspective of the community. Why ? What the rush
> for the Positions and to maintain the Positions. - Why can
> there be rotation ? If we have grown this big in Some - why
> cant there be rotation of teams - Initially when the Bylaws
> were made - there were not many number of people. Now there
> are. The Charter’s need / requirement and adoptions needs have
> evolved and changed and thus it should be adapted too.
>
> -VA
>
> Twitter : @TheVaibhavAg
>
> Facebook : @Vaibhav.tiger
>
> Linkedin :linkedin.com/in/vaibhavbb
> <http://linkedin.com/in/vaibhavbb>
>
> —————————————————————
>
> On Jun 2, 2020, at 7:50 PM, Stephanie E Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at MAIL.UTORONTO.CA
> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at MAIL.UTORONTO.CA>> wrote:
>
> The ballot does not say none of the above any more, it
> says abstain.
>
> Stephanie
>
> On 2020-06-02 10:02 a.m., Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> Liz, I understand your disappointment, but factually
> you are quite wrong.
>
> To say that Stephanie is Robin’s “favored candidate” –
> or the favorite of anyone on the NCSG EC – is almost
> laughably incorrect. Let me assure you, Robin is just
> trying to make the election conform to the rules, she
> is not promoting favorites.
>
> I agree with James that all this complaining is a bit
> late in the day. If people want to get into the
> election then they need to get into it, and not be coy
> and worry about whether someone else is running. The
> underlying problem here is not just the rigidity of
> the charter, but also the lack of alternative candidates.
>
> I do have a constructive suggestion to make. If people
> are concerned about this weird situation produced by
> the gender diversity rule, then one option is to vote
> “none of the above” for the candidate you object to.
> Let’s suppose that a candidate gets 50% or more of
> these “votes of no confidence.” In such a case, the
> candidate would have a strong incentive to re-evaluate
> the situation and perhaps drop out and let the EC
> appoint another person. Of course that appointment
> would have to conform to the rules, but the “none of
> the above” vote would allow us to avoid an “automatic”
> election of anyone.
>
> *From:*NCSG-Discuss<NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>*On Behalf
> Of*Liz Orembo
> *Sent:*Tuesday, June 2, 2020 7:18 AM
> *To:*NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> *Subject:*Re: NCSG Election Clarifications
>
> Hi Amir,
>
> I'm sorry it looks like im responding to your email.
> My email is in response to the whole thread and esp on
> Robin's clarification.
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 2:13 PM Amr Elsadr
> <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja
> <mailto:aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Grace. I appreciate the clarification.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Amr
>
> On Jun 2, 2020, at 1:07 PM, Grace Githaiga
> <ggithaiga at hotmail.com
> <mailto:ggithaiga at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not at all Amr. And I was not refering to you.
> I actually appreciate your interpretation. I
> just happened to respond on your response.
>
> I have read the different emails from
> different people and for me, this is a good
> debate because we are now forced to scrutinize
> the bylaws. I hope this sets the record
> straight Amr.
>
> Rgds
>
> Grace
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Grace Githaiga*
>
> Twitter: @ggithaiga
>
> Skype: gracegithaiga
>
> Linkedin:
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/gracegithaiga
>
> ././*/.the most important office in a
> democracy is the citizen. So, you see, that’s
> what our democracy demands. It needs
> you!----Barrack Obama./*
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja
> <mailto:aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>>
> *Sent:* 02 June 2020 2:03 PM
> *To:* Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga at hotmail.com
> <mailto:ggithaiga at hotmail.com>>
> *Cc:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU><NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
> *Subject:* Re: NCSG Election Clarifications
>
> Hi Grace,
>
> Apologies if that is the impression I gave. I
> assure you, that was not my intent. I’m not
> trying to justify anything, really. Only
> trying to explain my understanding of the
> Bylaws as I have read them. When I do attempt
> to interpret them, and share that
> interpretation with the NCSG membership, I do
> my best to provide references, so that our
> members may read the relevant sections for
> themselves.
>
> I’m not, of course, infallible. I may make a
> mistake, misread something, misinterpret its
> intent or even overlook another relevant part
> of the Bylaws, so pointing to references also
> helps others fill in gaps I may have
> unintentionally left.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Jun 2, 2020, at 12:58 PM, Grace
> Githaiga <ggithaiga at hotmail.com
> <mailto:ggithaiga at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Interesting debate! These clarifications
> are good as they help in scrutinizing and
> understanding of the bylaws. We are seeing
> different interpretations mostly trying to
> justify positions that the different
> people are taking. It would be important
> not to bend them just to suit what we want.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Grace Githaiga*
>
> Twitter: @ggithaiga
>
> Skype: gracegithaiga
>
> Linkedin:
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/gracegithaiga
>
> ././*/.the most important office in a
> democracy is the citizen. So, you see,
> that’s what our democracy demands. It
> needs you!----Barrack Obama./*
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* NCSG-Discuss
> <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>> on
> behalf of Amr Elsadr
> <aelsadr at ICANNPOLICY.NINJA
> <mailto:aelsadr at ICANNPOLICY.NINJA>>
> *Sent:* 02 June 2020 1:26 PM
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
> *Subject:* Re: NCSG Election Clarifications
>
> Hi,
>
> On Jun 2, 2020, at 6:29 AM, Tapani
> Tarvainen <ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO
> <mailto:ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO>>
> wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
> Second, the one-year term does not
> count in term limit in this case,
> as per ICANN Bylaws 11.3(b). That is,
> whoever gets it may be elected
> twice after that for a total of five
> years, whereas those who get two
> years now can only do only one
> additional term for a total of four
> years (absent special circumstances we
> discussed with Amr earlier,
> which could allow an extra term in
> either case).
>
> I don’t believe this is correct. Only
> those selected/appointed to fill a vacancy
> fit the scenario you’re describing here,
> Tapani. So, for example, Juan was
> appointed to fill a vacancy on Council.
> The time he served does not count toward
> his two consecutive terms limit, and he
> may run for a full Council term now (or a
> one-year term depending on the number of
> votes he gets), and if elected, may run
> for a second full term in two years time.
>
> Whoever gets elected to fill the leftover
> 1-year period has this 1-year term count
> towards the two consecutive term limit, so
> will have a maximum possibility of three
> consecutive years on Council, instead of
> four (not five instead of four).
>
> The relevant language in the Bylaws says:
>
> /"Except in a "special circumstance," such
> as, but not limited to, meeting geographic
> or other diversity requirements defined in
> the Stakeholder Group charters, where no
> alternative representative is available to
> serve, no Council member may be selected
> to serve more than two consecutive terms,
> in such a special circumstance a Council
> member may serve one additional term.
> *_For these purposes, a person selected to
> fill a vacancy in a term shall not be
> deemed to have served that term._* A
> former Council member who has served two
> consecutive terms must remain out of
> office for one full term prior to serving
> any subsequent term as Council member. A
> "special circumstance" is defined in the
> //GNSO// Operating Procedures."/ [emphasis
> added]
>
> An elected Councilor is not filling a
> vacant seat. The seat is his or hers once
> elected. Vacant seats are filled by
> selection/appointment, not by election. A
> “vacancy” on the GNSO Council is defined
> in Article 11.3(c) of the ICANN Bylaws.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards.
>
> Liz.
>
>
> PGP ID:0x1F3488BF
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200602/77ae7f4b/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list