[EC-NCSG] NCSG Membership Applications and EC Evaluation Procedures

Sun Sep 29 12:37:49 EEST 2013

Hi,

I see no objections to the tweaked approached: splitting the list for
clarity, 2 week of evaluation by all EC members starting from monday 30th
Sept (you can start earlier of course!), planning possible confcall to go
through contentious applications if needed.
I added sheets sent by Marie-laure to the current shared file to avoid a
versioning nightmare and we should so check the sheet called "pending" and
put vote there
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dENsT21PLTFmeW9qZ2pLLWowc3RTbmc&usp=sharing

Best,

Rafik

2013/9/21 marie-laure Lemineur <mllemineur at gmail.com>

> Dear Rafik,
>
> Uploading the "new excell doc/the only pending applications" does make a
> lot of sense  for all the reasons you mention. Setting up a deadline
> (as well as a formal starting date!) would also be a good thing in my
> opinion. Only I think that having a deadline that would allow us a two
> weeks time frame instead of just one week would be more realistic. Since we
> are five people, it would provide more flexibility for each of us to get
> organized and plan the time needed to review all applications. Maybe the
> conf call can be arranged towards the end of the deadline, to have an
> opportunity to share opinions in case there is disagreement over some
> applications. I don' t know if that was the objective of the conf call you
> proposed but I would agree with doing it anyway.
>
> Best,
>
> Marie-laure
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks to Marie-Laure for the editing and new format,
>> I am cautious with using excel file and exchanging different versions by
>> email sinceit will be hard to follow with 5 people having to write down
>> their decision. I can upload this new document as google doc(or google
>> drive) and sharing it with all EC members for editing. so we approve some
>> applications quickly without prejudicing others
>> I think that we can go for all pending applications, some of them we have
>> processed and got to get some clarifications from applicants.
>> we can have 1 week to cover those 42 applications, each EC member stating
>> approve/disapprove and giving rationale for the latter after doing doing
>> due digilence for review applicants. having some questions, we can ask
>> applicants for clarification.
>> we don't have a checklist per se, but we have the criteria for
>> eligibility for organisational and individual membership stated in our
>> charter https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Charter
>> having a deadline will help us to go forward. we can also have a confcall
>> if discuss on specific applications and take actions
>> does it make sense?if there is no objection, we can proceed following
>> that.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> 2013/9/11 marie-laure Lemineur <mllemineur at gmail.com>
>>
>>> Dear Rafik, Robin, Lori and al.,
>>>
>>> Over these last days I  have started to review the list of pending
>>> applications that Rafik kindly uploaded. Rafik answering a question I asked
>>> him told me I should review row 1 to 32 ie review 31 applications. I
>>> started doing it but realized the following:
>>>
>>> -the current list uploaded gathers pending applications and already
>>> approved applications;
>>> - Since Rafik had already worked on the list. I self-volunteered to also
>>> contribute and not bother Rafik anymore. This is why I proceeded, in the
>>> document that you will find attached,  to separate what is labelled on the
>>> original list sent by Rafik as "pending" and what is labelled as "approved
>>> applications". They are three taps in the same Excel doc;
>>> -As a result of this, you will realize that instead of having 117 rows
>>> with mixed application status, now we have  a  list of strictly pending
>>> applications from row 1 to row 43 on one list which means that there are
>>> only 42 pending applications;
>>> -the 61 approved applications have been copied and pasted in the
>>> separate list;
>>> -Among those 42 applications I am aware of some who have been in the
>>> queue for quite some time now;
>>>
>>>  I am proposing that instead of reviewing 31 applications we might as
>>> well review the 42 ie the whole batch. It does not really make sense (in my
>>> humble opinion)  to left out 11 applications and it does not make a huge
>>> difference either. If we do this round, we might as well want to complete
>>> it once for all.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Marie-laure
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Marie-Laure,
>>>>
>>>> no problem,
>>>> please review the application from row #2 to row # 30, they are the
>>>> latest applications we should cover.
>>>> for colors, they are used for old application we checked previously,
>>>> maybe Robin can explain better about their meaning.
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>>
>>>>  Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/9/3 marie-laure Lemineur <mllemineur at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Rafik,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks. I will have time to do this starting Wednesday, Thurday and
>>>>> Friday. Could you please explain to me if the colors have a particular
>>>>> meaning. I have not been able to figure it out... sorry :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Merci!
>>>>>
>>>>> Marie-laure
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Robin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sorry for delay, I updated the "pending applications" file, we have
>>>>>> 29 applications to cover , for this week hopefully and I think that is
>>>>>> doable.
>>>>>> please check this file for review
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dENsT21PLTFmeW9qZ2pLLWowc3RTbmc&usp=sharing
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> I will be glad to assist our new EC members regarding the review
>>>>>> process
>>>>>> In other hand, for a better applications solution, I will be glad to
>>>>>> discuss with ICANN staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Rafik
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2013/8/28 Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear All:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As you all know, we need an integrated membership database solution
>>>>>>> to manage the NCSG membership applications, membership rosters, etc. and
>>>>>>> ICANN hasn't yet provided a solution (although it said it was working on
>>>>>>> one for all of ICANN, not just NCSG).  So in the meantime, we are using
>>>>>>> these Google docs spreadsheets to manage the membership data, even though
>>>>>>> it is rather cumbersome to navigate and far from the best solution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reminder that the data for incoming NCSG Membership applications is
>>>>>>> stored in a spreadsheet and available to EC members here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ane1uzL43HhedDFhOWZOTEVhMzZUYUszVFhpX1JEU1E&usp=sharing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The spreadsheet that keeps track of the immediately pending
>>>>>>> applications, including how each NCSG member votes on a given application
>>>>>>> is here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dENsT21PLTFmeW9qZ2pLLWowc3RTbmc&usp=sharing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I believe Rafik volunteered to update the immediately above PENDING
>>>>>>> applications link to reflect the new applications that have come in for
>>>>>>> evaluation in the last few weeks and that we need to evaluate now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Each NCSG EC member should then evaluate the application against
>>>>>>> NCSG's membership criteria and noncommercial mission and then we vote on
>>>>>>> the application's approval in the above link.  Sometimes there are
>>>>>>> questions or info is not complete so follow-ups are needed with applicants.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We can type our vote or comment directly into the PENDING
>>>>>>> spreadsheet so the discussion is all in one place and publicly available
>>>>>>> (and applicants can keep track of their application by looking at this
>>>>>>> link).  We evaluate the data supplied by the applicant in the spreadsheet
>>>>>>> at 1st link (private) above, but we each vote in the spreadsheet 2nd link
>>>>>>> (public).   Again, the need for an integrated membership database.....
>>>>>>>  Thanks very much.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please let me know if you have any questions on this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Robin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> EC-NCSG mailing list
>>>>>>> EC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/ec-ncsg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> EC-NCSG mailing list
>>>>>> EC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/ec-ncsg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/attachments/20130929/319f07ed/attachment.html>