[PC-NCSG] Regarding request to add an additional seat to the nominating committee for the NPOC constituency

Thu Jul 11 09:29:55 EEST 2013

Hi

I probably would not have mentioned travel funding, as they've fixed on that and tied it to broader perceptions.  The issue that "the GNSO" is overrepresented is somewhat beside the point; the parts of GNSO that are overrepresented are others, not CS.  So it's not just a matter of balance between GNSO and other, but rather of within GNSO.  To say that one board recognized constituency should have no representation because others have been given too much is just, odd.

Bill

On Jul 10, 2013, at 4:51 PM, Alain Berranger <alain.berranger at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> FYI and chronology. Cheers, Alain
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ray Plzak <plzakr at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 3:46 PM
> Subject: RE: Regarding request to add an additional seat to the nominating committee for the NPOC constituency
> To: Alain Berranger <alain.berranger at gmail.com>, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
> Cc: Amy Stathos <amy.stathos at icann.org>, John Jeffrey <john.jeffrey at icann.org>
> 
> 
> Alain,
> 
>  
> 
> Sorry for the delay in answering your ?structural? question. Structural changes are made to ICANN structures when they are supported with a rationale that shows that the change will benefit the organization (in this case the NomCom). The NPOC request has highlighted the long standing matter concerning the composition of the NomCom. Currently, the distribution of members has an over representation of the GNSO and the ALAC when compared to the other organizations that appoint members to the NomCom. The highlighting of this issue by the NPOC request along with several other concerns raised within the past 12 months in areas dealing with the dual role of the NomCom in recruitment and selection, stabilizing operational procedures, and ethical concerns has prompted the SIC to recommend to the Board that the organizational review of the NomCom be conducted than anticipated. The SIC recently made this recommendation which is why I delayed my response to you. I wanted to wait for the SIC to complete its work.
> 
>  
> 
> Regarding the rationale that you have presented I understand it to be two fold:
> 
>  
> 
>                 1. Without the NPOC receiving funding for a representative to travel to a NomCom meeting conducted at the site of an ICANN meeting, the NPOC is under represented at the ICANN meeting; and
> 
>                 2. Without NPOC membership on the NomCom the civil society is under represented on the NomCom.
> 
>  
> 
> My comments regarding this rationale:
> 
>  
> 
>                 1. NomCom membership is not intended to be a funding source for persons to attend an ICANN meeting. The fact the NomCom conducts its meetings at ICANN meeting sites is a matter of convenience. One can easily make the argument that the NomCom meeting should not be at the ICANN site as the members of the NomCom can be distracted by other matters and because of burdens during the week, the NomCom members can be not at their prime when they meet at the end of the week.
> 
>  
> 
>                 2. The NPOC is a part of the GNSO and would thus be one more GNSO appointee to the NomCom further exacerbating the imbalance among membership sources. Considering the NPOC as a civil society representative creates a similar imbalance with regard to the members participating from the ALAC.
> 
>  
> 
> If the board moves forward with the NPOC organizational review, I would welcome your involvement in the process.
> 
>  
> 
> Ray
> 
>  
> 
> From: Alain Berranger [mailto:alain.berranger at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 11:06 AM
> To: Bruce Tonkin
> Cc: Amy Stathos; Ray Plzak; John Jeffrey
> Subject: Re: Regarding request to add an additional seat to the nominating committee for the NPOC constituency
> 
>  
> 
> Hello again Bruce,
> 
>  
> 
> Sorry for belated response to your question below on account of recent vacations.
> 
>  
> 
> You say below: "Does that refer to travel funding for nominating committee members?   I have heard issues of travel funding come up in other forums as well - including that the nominating committee may not need to actually meet at an ICANN meeting, but could meet elsewhere."
> 
>  
> 
> Yes it does. Since Nom Com actually meets at ICANN meetings, my statement that NPOC gets one less representative at ICANN meetings is true (compounding further that NPOC is "less equal amongst equal Constituencies" because it is the only Constituency without a Nom Com seat). If and when Non Com meets elsewhere, of course my statement would not stand. The former is the current reality (and has been since I became active at ICANN at the San Francisco meeting), the latter is hypothetical.
> 
>  
> 
> The other impact of NPOC's exclusion is that Civil Society is only represented by two Nom Com seats (currently held by Adam Peake and Rafik Dammak) instead of having 3 seats out of a total of 21 seats. Not quite an equal voice between civil society, government and private sector, the very basic "tro?ka" or "3-legged stool" at the heart of a multi-stakeholder model.
> 
>  
> 
> I reiterate that giving a Nom Com seat to NPOC can be dealt with easily and on a short-term basis, while "more complex Structural Improvements" naturally take more time. I hear excellent management rationale at various times from Ray Plzak and would love to hear his views on NPOC's position here.
> 
>  
> 
> Ray, my generic question is, albeit probably naive given my newness in ICANN: in an organization, does all structural improvements need to be parked and dealt with as a batch? or can "easy and simple" structural improvements, like NPOC's request in my opinion, be treated soonest possible.
> 
>  
> 
> I do not think I will have any more questions on this subject after this. NPOC holds a Constituency-wide monthly call on the second Tuesday of every month and this situation is on our agenda for Dec 11, 2012.
> 
>  
> 
> Best regards, Alain
> 
>  
> 
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
> 
> Hello Alain,
> 
> Thanks for your quick reply.  I can confirm that your request was taken seriously, and discussed I the context with improvements being suggested from several parties.
> 
> 
> >>   John of course can say if that is possible or not, but I understand that bylaws changes require Board Approval.
> 
> Yes - and require an appropriate community review process as well.
> 
>  There have been other requests for changes to the nominating committee - including balancing numbers of reps from GNSO, ALAC, ccNSO, ASO  etc.   So your request is not the only request, and some of the requests conflict with each other.
> 
> 
> 
> >>  A final point: this decision also has repercussions on the resources available to NPOC to participate in equal numbers as other Constituencies in ICANN meetings. That is a secondary effect, but a real one nevertheless.
> 
> Does that refer to travel funding for nominating committee members?   I have heard issues of travel funding come up in other forums as well - including that the nominating committee may not need to actually meet at an ICANN meeting, but could meet elsewhere.
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> -- 
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> 
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> 
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
> 
> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
> 
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALIT?
> 
> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est ? l?usage exclusif du destinataire ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le pr?sent message sans en ?tre le destinataire, ou l?employ?(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au destinataire, est par les pr?sentes avis?e qu?il lui est strictement interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut ?tre joint ou si ce document vous a ?t? communiqu? par erreur, veuillez nous en informer sur le champ  et d?truire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de votre coop?ration.
> 
>  
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
> 
> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose, distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.orgMember, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
> 
> 
> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALIT?
> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est ? l?usage exclusif du destinataire ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le pr?sent message sans en ?tre le destinataire, ou l?employ?(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au destinataire, est par les pr?sentes avis?e qu?il lui est strictement interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut ?tre joint ou si ce document vous a ?t? communiqu? par erreur, veuillez nous en informer sur le champ  et d?truire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de votre coop?ration.
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose, distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130711/fefe1fcd/attachment-0001.html>