[NCUC-DISCUSS] URGENT - Time sensitive What is your view on on the question of rebalancing the Nominating Committee (NomCom)
Olévié A. A Kouami
olivierkouami at GMAIL.COM
Tue Jun 27 08:08:51 EEST 2023
Greetings from Sénégal.
What rich and fruitfull discussion !
In fact, this happened only when the rights persons are in their rights
places.
Never been confused between speeding and.rushing. Lesson learned.
+ 1 for the NPOC have its seat in the NPOC.
We'll fght for this.
Kudos to you all.
Warm regards
Olévié
Le mar. 27 juin 2023, 06:28, Raoul Plommer <plommer at gmail.com> a écrit :
> The way I see it, is either adding one seat for NomCom and having two
> seats per SG or reducing three GNSO seats (all from the CSG) and having one
> each. If NomCom is too big as it is, then it would make more sense to
> reduce the amount of GNSO seats. The only compromise I could see happening
> is taking 2 off CSG and adding one to NCSG, reducing the total number of
> GNSO seats to six.
>
> The point is, if we're supposed to pretend to be a remotely functional
> multistakeholder model, the commercial group should be just as big as its
> noncommercial counterpart.
>
> -Raoul
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 at 07:31, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Judith
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 11:32 PM Judith Hellerstein <
>> judith at jhellerstein.com> wrote:
>>
>>> HI Farzi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your comments and views. I have just finished off two years
>>> on NomCom, and so I take issue with your statement that NomCom is not doing
>>> well. Please explain what you mean by that.
>>>
>>
>> As we say in Farsi let me put the shyness aside and ask you, who are you
>> on NCSG and where have you been. I do not remember you being appointed by
>> us. So you were representing ALAC. We are not a family. Not even a
>> dysfunctional one. ALAC does not understand our GNSO complexities and that
>> has always been a problem. But I will tell you what I mean by NomCom not
>> doing well for the past 5-6 years.
>>
>>> I am not privy to explain what transpired this year, but we have worked
>>> very hard to get independent thinkers and outsiders onto the boards and
>>> leadership positions. This year we had a much larger pool thanks to the
>>> addition of a recruitment firm helping to outreach to candidates for the
>>> GNSO, CCNSO, and ALAC leadership position. The delegates work hard to get
>>> independent and outside thinkers to fill the leadership positions but we
>>> work with the priorities that each constituency has given to Nomcom. If
>>> these priorities for the GNSO slots are not accurate than they should be
>>> revised
>>>
>> Oh good. Because we see the appointment of former intellectual property
>> constituencies members. And frankly since NCAs prolly better not be from
>> NCSG either I am glad to hear that you have a more diverse pool.
>> a few years ago nomcom went through a really strange operational
>> procedure change. led by our unsurprisingly CSG (BC and IPC) colleagues to
>> make it less transparent all under the disguise of confidentiality. At
>> some point NomCom appointed an NCA who was an employee of ITU at the time!
>> NomCom appointed people with conflict of interest to various groups, see
>> the ccnso letter here
>> <https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/field-attached/sataki-to-nomcomm-29sep17-en.pdf>.
>> When you were serving, maybe it got better. But we still observed the
>> musical chair. People from GAC later on were appointed to various positions
>> that were supposed to be non-governmental, noncommercial.
>>
>>> The public comments on the NomCom2 Review report we were just asked to
>>> comment on the items in the report that were up for validation.
>>> Unfortunately, the issue of NomCom REbalancing was withdrawn from the
>>> report, and so we could not comment on it. This is why there were two
>>> processes. The letter and the response to the public comments. I just
>>> worked on the response to the public comments and worked closely with the
>>> NCUC rep Peter on these comments.
>>>
>> Good. So you are, I believe an NCSG member now working to advance our
>> interest. Allow me to take this moment and tell you that while we are
>> collegial with ALAC we don't agree on everything.
>>
>>>
>>> Stefanie is correct in her analysis and her review. There does not seem
>>> to be an appetite or interest to expand the NomCom beyond the current
>>> numbers. What there was interest in is having each constituency be
>>> responsible for each of their delegates.
>>>
>> Frankly, I don't give a damn about appetite whatsoever, we are not asking
>> for expansion. If the number of members reduced, but we are given equal
>> delegation I think we would be happy. If it's reducing the number of
>> advisory committee members to make it smaller, so be it! less travel, less
>> resources and same results!
>>
>>> Also from what I have heard while at ICANN 77 is that the GAC is
>>> rethinking their approach and may indeed begin to use its seat in the
>>> coming years. Happy to be of help and share my experience on NomCom and I
>>> am sure Peter will share his experience.
>>>
>> Oh ok. so insisting on having advisory committees be a voting member
>> backfired. Good good. But advisory committees should also appoint an equal
>> number of members. One each?
>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Judith
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________________
>>> Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
>>> Hellerstein & Associates
>>> 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
>>> Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein
>>> Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
>>> E-mail: Judith at jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com
>>> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/
>>> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/27/23 12:21 PM, farzaneh badii wrote:
>>>
>>> I made some changes:
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/file/d/1garMNp-pIeJ-dp2NAZjLIdNTuvDQmfoB/edit?usp=docslist_api&filetype=msword
>>>
>>> We need to ask for equal number of delegates and get it done with.
>>> NomCom is not doing well anyway and I am not sure it’s because of the
>>> composition. Anyway. Comments attached. Please discuss these issues on the
>>> general member mailing list so that we know what is going on.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 9:06 PM Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>> I tend to support this position, but then, we needed to have an
>>>> internal mechanism within the NCSG to manage the outcome, assuming our
>>>> request is yet to be accepted and how to make due in terms of rotating our
>>>> slots to ensure even representation within the NCSG family, especially as
>>>> it may affect NPOC that largely has been missing in representation without
>>>> much home grown support within the NCSG.
>>>>
>>>> Internal democracy/MoU will prepare our minds in the journey ahead so
>>>> as to rebalance even within, bearing in mind that NomCom rebalancing is not
>>>> only about us (NCSG) but depends on the total acceptable number for the
>>>> larger NomCom to work with as may be approved.
>>>>
>>>> At the same time lets maintain equal footing for equal quota between
>>>> non-commercial and commercial as annunciated.
>>>>
>>>> ___________________
>>>> REMMY NWEKE, *mNUJ, mNGE, mGOCOP*
>>>> Lead Consulting Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
>>>> *ITREALMS Media* group [*Multiple-award winning medium*]
>>>> (ITREALMS <http://www.itrealms.com.ng/>, DigitalSENSE Business Magazine
>>>> <http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng/businessnews>; NaijaAgroNet
>>>> <http://www.naijaagronet.com.ng/>)
>>>> No. 36 Afariogun Street, Oshodi-Lagos
>>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/No.+36+Afariogun+Street,+Oshodi-Lagos?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, T: @ITRealms
>>>> <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
>>>> @DigitalSENSEng
>>>> 2023 *Nigeria DigitalSENSE Forum on IG4D*, Thursday June 8
>>>> <https://www.itrealms.com.ng/>
>>>> 2023 *ITREALMS* e-Waste Dialogue, Thursday December 7
>>>> <https://www.itrealms.com.ng/>
>>>> @Welcome Center Hotels, Int'l Airport Road, Lagos-Nigeria
>>>> <http://welcomecentrehotels.com/>
>>>> Former Vice President, African Civil Society on Information Society
>>>> (ACSIS)
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and
>>>> attachments
>>>> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
>>>> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept
>>>> legal
>>>> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the
>>>> intended
>>>> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and
>>>> do
>>>> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor
>>>> make
>>>> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 12:30 AM farzaneh badii <
>>>> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I absolutely disagree to make this a constituency matter. It is the
>>>>> card that they played for so long to argue that we didnt have as many
>>>>> constituency. As stakeholder group, if they have 3 reps we should have 3
>>>>> reps. If we have one as stakeholder group they should have one. If you
>>>>> wanna make them smaller stop having 5 ALAC/at large delegates. No reason
>>>>> for that they are an advisory committee like everyone else.
>>>>>
>>>>> I keep hearing that we should compromise on this and that and that we
>>>>> have better things to do. What are these better things? We are here to
>>>>> advance our interest. By sitting on policy positions we cannot get
>>>>> anywhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephanie, if you have written something great. If not we just turn my
>>>>> response with correction to a statement and send it off. We can’t wait
>>>>> forever.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 6:53 PM Stephanie E Perrin <
>>>>> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The fault is not Caleb's it is mine. I have been working on that
>>>>>> draft. Judith Hellerstein was kind enough to draft the response to the
>>>>>> call for comments, and I had intended to circulate the draft for comments
>>>>>> this past weekend. Unfortunately a health emergency in my family has
>>>>>> dragged me away. There was quite a bit of discussion around the meeting in
>>>>>> Washington on this topic, and it also had come up at Council. Council is
>>>>>> just now preparing its draft response to the Board. We have till the 30th
>>>>>> and Julf is standing by to send the final draft, so please lets not panic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is strong opposition to growing the Nomcom, as it grows it
>>>>>> becomes more unwieldy, and they are already working very hard. So I would
>>>>>> submit that asking for three delegates, just like the commercial group, is
>>>>>> a non-starter. However, the battle to get a seat for NPOC, at least at the
>>>>>> GNSO level, appears to be turning in our favour. Please see my comments re
>>>>>> the questions below, and expect to see a tidied up draft comment shortly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2023-06-26 5:50 p.m., Raoul Plommer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Caleb,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You received that very email on 27th of April, and since you've been
>>>>>> preparing the draft since, perhaps you could finally share your work with
>>>>>> us so we could make that statement together as a stakeholder group?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Raoul
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 at 21:46, farzaneh badii <
>>>>>> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where are NCSG's joint recommendations? NCUC can reinforce the
>>>>>>> message.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 2:44 PM Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele <
>>>>>>> muyiwacaleb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I believe NCUC can consolidate the response with the NCSG's joint
>>>>>>>> recommendations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This will allow us to go out on a united front as non-commercial.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 1:40 PM farzaneh badii <
>>>>>>>> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Benjamin,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not only do we need to respond, we should reach out to our friends
>>>>>>>>> and colleagues and tell them what the problem is. See the
>>>>>>>>> responses below:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 1:57 PM Benjamin Akinmoyeje <
>>>>>>>>> benakin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Dear NCUC members,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Good day and I hope your week is going well.
>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for participating in the NCUC Readout session. As
>>>>>>>>>> discussed in the meeting today, please share your response to these
>>>>>>>>>> questions to gather our community views.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ICANN Board Chair Tripti Sinha is requesting feedback from your
>>>>>>>>>> respective community groups on the question of rebalancing the
>>>>>>>>>> Nominating Committee (NomCom) by **30 June 2023**. As noted in
>>>>>>>>>> the letter, the ICANN Board wishes to engage with the community
>>>>>>>>>> to understand the community’s views on this topic. The Board is
>>>>>>>>>> specifically seeking input on the following questions:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1. What does it mean to have a balanced NomCom at a point in
>>>>>>>>>> time? For example, what criteria would you apply to measure or assess
>>>>>>>>>> whether the
>>>>>>>>>> NomCom is balanced? And further, how can one test whether or not
>>>>>>>>>> the NomCom is balanced?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A balanced NomCom means that the noncommercial and commercial
>>>>>>>>> stakeholder groups as predicted have the same number of delegates. For
>>>>>>>>> example, if the Commercial Group has three delegates, the noncommercial
>>>>>>>>> group should have three delegates. This is the least that can be done when
>>>>>>>>> rebalancing.It should be remodeled based on GNSO council composition.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Do you support the view that the current composition of the
>>>>>>>>>> NomCom needs to be rebalanced? Please explain why or why not.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes it needs to be rebalanced because as we have argued the
>>>>>>>>> noncommercials have fewer delegates compared to the commercial stakeholder
>>>>>>>>> group. In every ICANN group, the commercial and noncommercial stakeholder
>>>>>>>>> groups should have equal number of delegates, irrespective of how many
>>>>>>>>> internal constituencies they each have.* (SP see above, I doubt
>>>>>>>>> this has support. we just need to have members for each constituency,
>>>>>>>>> bearing in mind that the contracted parties do not have consitutuencies,
>>>>>>>>> and the At Large has regions not constituencies.)*
>>>>>>>>> Also the advisory committees either should be voting delegates or
>>>>>>>>> non-voting delegates. Perhaps because ICANN is privately led and the chair
>>>>>>>>> of GAC is a liaison on the board the nonvoting nomcom (which they have
>>>>>>>>> never appointed) might make sense but it is unclear why some advisory
>>>>>>>>> committees are voting and some are not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *SP The recommendation has already been accepted to make all seats
>>>>>> on the NomCom voting*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3. How frequently does the balance need to be measured or
>>>>>>>>>> assessed?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> After rebalancing, if the review of various ICANN structures lead
>>>>>>>>> to structural changes (which it rarely does) then we need to
>>>>>>>>> assess whether it should affect delegation on Nomcom.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *SP I think it best, as I have said at every PC committee when the
>>>>>> matter ever came up, to steer as clear of structural review as possible.
>>>>>> Lets agree on 10 years for NomCom review once we get this settled, unless
>>>>>> there is a sudden need to reassess. Reviews take time, money, staff
>>>>>> resources, and are exhausting our volunteers.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 4. How do you suggest that the NomCom’s composition be rebalanced
>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Same number of delegates from Commercial and Noncommercial
>>>>>>>>> stakeholders group. If CSG has 3 delegates, NCSG has to have 3 delegates
>>>>>>>>> too. We don't necessarily ask for increasing the number of our delegates
>>>>>>>>> but we ask to reconsider the number of delegates CSG can have.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *SP We appear to be winning the argument on constituency
>>>>>> representation, lets settle for that.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 5. Who should conduct this work, and how should it be conducted?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The board should follow the third party reviewer recommendation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *SP I believe the how refers to reallocation of NomCom reps.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 6. How would your community group prioritize consideration of
>>>>>>>>>> this issue
>>>>>>>>>> within your planning efforts?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This has been a priority issue for NCUC and NCSG since a long
>>>>>>>>> time. We are directly affected.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> SP *Given that the NomCom reps are supposed to act independently
>>>>>> of their organizations, I would avoid saying that we are directly
>>>>>> affected. Obviously we would have had another seat years ago if everyone
>>>>>> in this organization had faith in that independence, and the GAC might have
>>>>>> surrendered the seat they have never used.....but we have to have a strong
>>>>>> belief in the independence and fair HR practices of the new NomCom that
>>>>>> will emerge after this review. We are the ones who are short a seat, so
>>>>>> clearly it has been on our priorities and it will remain there until this
>>>>>> fundamental injustice is corrected. To my mind, we lack qualitative review
>>>>>> of the actual outputs of the NomCom, and we lack a substantive study of
>>>>>> what the goals of a restructured nomcom might be. ICANN is 25, and there
>>>>>> are plenty of folks around who have been here all that time. What does it
>>>>>> mean to get new blood to join ICANN from outside the membership groups?
>>>>>> What does the MS model need after 25 years? How did the review committee
>>>>>> discuss this issue? are there studies?*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Those of you who sat on these groups, and there are several of you
>>>>>> out there who did, please weigh in.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind regards, and apologies for the failure to send the draft this
>>>>>> weekend as planned. Life gets in the way.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stephanie Perrin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Additional background on the work to date on this topic,
>>>>>>>>>> including by the NomCom Review Implementation Working Group that
>>>>>>>>>> was set up to implement the outcomes of the Second NomCom Review
>>>>>>>>>> (see https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence> for each
>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>> letters sent to all 21 SOAC leaders). In addition, on 25 May
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, the
>>>>>>>>>> Chair of the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee,
>>>>>>>>>> Katrina
>>>>>>>>>> Sataki, and members of ICANN org’s Reviews Support &
>>>>>>>>>> Accountability team
>>>>>>>>>> gave a presentation to the GNSO Council that covered the present
>>>>>>>>>> structure of NomCom, a brief history of the rebalancing matter
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> forthcoming actions. As such, you may find the presentation
>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/presentation/presentation-gnso-council-
>>>>>>>>>> nomcom-rebalancing-revised-25may23-en.pdf> and
>>>>>>>>>> the recording
>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>> https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/7pSQ37mSB5wGz8-msQS2PDpzhQ6VdJQISm2SYmWKwfFMWFM_Z6FdMsFiipNyIV-E.J55mm5SBjoZJS9d9?startTime=1684990882000
>>>>>>>>>> > (from
>>>>>>>>>> 00:14:10 - 00:31:38) helpful in discussing any planned feedback
>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> your members.
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> *Caleb Ogundele*
>>>>>>>> Email: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing listNcuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.orghttps://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20230627/48e0522c/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list