GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) meeting Monday 27 Jan 2025

[Pedro de Perdigão Lana]

Thanks once again for the detailed report, Julf!

Adding to the last part of your comment, if the community would like to
search for potential improvements to the current charter, this is the link
to the current version: https://community.icann.org/display/GSSC/2.+Charter
.

Pgs. 5 and 6 (part of "Section IV: Rules of Engagement"), appear to be most
relevant text to be analyzed..

Cordially,

*Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
Lawyer <https://www.nic.br/>, GEDAI/UFPR <https://www.gedai.com.br/>
Researcher
PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra)
Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR <https://isoc.org.br/>, NCUC
<https://www.ncuc.org> & NCSG
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN),
YouthLACIGF <https://youthlacigf.lat/>, IODA <https://ioda.org.br/> and CC
Brasil <https://br.creativecommons.net/>
This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by
mistake, please reply informing it.


Em ter., 28 de jan. de 2025 às 07:21, Johan Helsingius <
00001963cc94b85a-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu> escreveu:

> Hi again everyone,
>
> It has been a busy period for the SSC, with meetings every week,
> but now all the appointments in the queue have been handled so
> the frequency of meetings should go down significantly.
>
> Yesterday the topic was the Latin Diacritics PDP Working Group Chair.
>
> Attendance was up, with all but 3 members (Mike Rodenbaugh (IPC),
> Frank Anati (NCSG) and Susan Mohr (ISPC) - Susan did submit apologies
> in advance) present.
>
> Again, as the SSC procedures prescribe a 48-hour consensus call
> period allowing committee members who were not in the meeting to
> raise objections I can't yet announce the result, but I can say
> that the candidate everyone in the NCSG camp thought best suited
> did get chosen.
>
> The way the SSC works is that an initial round is done by a 2-part
> poll. The first part asks SSC members to state, for each candidate,
> if they think the candidate satisfies the requirements for the
> position, and the second part asks the members to rank the candidates.
> Nominally this is just an initial poll to inform the discussion,
> but there has been little discussion and usually the poll results
> determine the choice.
>
> Interestingly the SSC vice chair Segunfunmi Olajide (BC) questioned the
> mechanism and its results.
>
> I did raise the issue that staff extended the poll deadline by 2 hours
> at last minute after chasing members who hadn't responded. My concern
> is that arbitrary decisions to extend the deadline can be used to
> influence the result and is unfair towards members who make the
> effort to meet the deadline.
>
> In the previous meeting I raised the question about the fact that the
> (anonymous) poll replies showed one member stating that the candidate
> at the top of the poll was not suitable, and wondered if that was a
> showstopper. The member who had given the answer identified themselves
> and explained that as a new member, they had answered "no" simply
> because that candidate wasn't one of their preferred choices, so it
> should not be seen as a showstopper.
>
> Seems that my question was misconstrued as wanting to know who answered
> what, and to my surprise, this time the polling results and answers
> showed who had voted and answered what. I did raise the issue that
> this should not happen without the members being told in advance that
> that would be the case, and the Chair, Karen Day (RySG) responded that
> "the decision was made under leadership discretion to provide an
> additional layer of transparency and provide full context to the
> outcome".
>
> In this case, it did give an opportunity to see that poll responses
> to a large degree reflected constituency/stakeholder group lines.
>
> There was also some discussion about possibly requesting the
> Council to review the SSC charter. The current charter will be
> circulated to SSC members for comments.
>
> So far no date has been set for the next meeting as there are
> no appointments pending.
>
>         Julf
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250128/721887d2/attachment.htm>