[PC-NCSG] CSG decision regarding our candidate
Klaus Stoll
klaus.stoll
Mon Jun 2 22:05:06 EEST 2014
Hi,
just to make my position clear again. Avri had her chance to be elected,
her chances to be supported by the CSG where as high or even lower as
Sams are now to be supported by the CSG. Was this then also "a poor use
of our precious few resources?" (Rafik). What is now different when it
comes to Sam? This is a question of fairness! We can not judge what
happens before it actually takes place.
As a second thought. We had an agreement in the NCSG about Sams
nomination following Avri. I agreed and voted consistently on that basis
for Avri giving her as much chances as was possible for me. It seems as
the NCUC candidate did not make it, the rules changed and all sorts of
lame excuses are made. Are we accepting now that the CSG is dictating to
us to ditch a candidate that has not even appeared on the ballot. If
that is the case I recommend, to make long things short, that we just
ask the CSG for their candidate and promise to vote for it. The end
effect is the same!.
Yours
Klaus
On 6/2/2014 7:10 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi Joy,
>
> for the end of game, it depends which election process we will agree
> with CSG , I suspect that they may suggest what they already proposed
> for next elections (when they thought we could elect a board member
> with the first 3 rounds), it seems more complex version of what Avri
> proposed
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2014-06-02 14:22 GMT+09:00 joy <joy at apc.org <mailto:joy at apc.org>>:
>
> thanks for the updates - as Stephanie requests, yes, it would be
> good to
> have reasons
> Klaus, I also do not understand the rationale of proposing a candidate
> that CSG has made clear they will not support - is this not a poor use
> of our precious few resources?
> meanwhile, any thoughts on the end game here?
>
> joy
>
> On 2/06/2014 5:20 a.m., Stephanie Perrin wrote:
> > why not, did they give a reason?
> > steph
> > ________________________________________
> > From: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org>
> <pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org>> on behalf of Amr Elsadr
> <aelsadr at egyptig.org <mailto:aelsadr at egyptig.org>>
> > Sent: June 1, 2014 12:01 PM
> > To: Avri Doria
> > Cc: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org <mailto:pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org>
> > Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] CSG decision regarding our candidate
> >
> > From what I can tell, the CSG have clearly indicated that they
> will not support Sam. Is there any reason to believe that there
> may be a splinter constituency within them that we don't know about?
> >
> > If not, I don't understand the rationale behind putting Sam up
> in a vote against a candidate of theirs. Klaus..., could you
> please elaborate on this?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Amr
> >
> > Sent from mobile
> >
> >> On Jun 1, 2014, at 5:19 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Perhaps he did not have a chance for stray votes, just as i
> never had a
> >> chance to go up against NOTA in a third round. He was selected
> as the
> >> compromise candidate and that did not work. Now we move on.
> >>
> >> Yes, we disagree.
> >> This is something the rest of the PC will have to weigh in on.
> >>
> >> avri
> >>
> >>> On 01-Jun-14 16:53, Klaus Stoll wrote:
> >>> Dear Colleagues
> >>>
> >>>> On 6/1/2014 2:44 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not think that makes sense. We already know that he is
> not going
> >>>> to get their votes.
> >>> to get their votes.
> >>>
> >>> I very strongly disagree with this! You had your chance to see
> if there
> >>> are any stray votes, Sam has the same right to have a chance
> to collect
> >>> stray votes. In fact I have a feeling that he might be able to
> pick 2
> >>> votes up, he was well received by some.
> >>>> First we need to come to a mutual decide that none of the
> previous
> >>>> candidates are qualified to run.
> >>> Agree, on the other side, why should we allow Bill to take the due
> >>> process hostage?
> >>>> Then CSG and NCSG pick 2 new candidates
> >>> See above, much too early! Sam needs to have his day!
> >>>> And we come up with a procedure that terminates - like the one i
> >>>> suggested.
> >>> We should discuss this, but nothing is agreed and decided!
> >>>
> >>> Yours
> >>>
> >>> Klaus
> >>>> avri
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 01-Jun-14 15:29, Klaus Stoll wrote:
> >>>>> Dear Friends
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Greetings. We should be disappointed but not beaten. We
> should still put
> >>>>> Sam up as a candidate and have one if not three round of
> votes on him.
> >>>>> We might be n for a pleasant surprise.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yours
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Klaus
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/30/2014 11:54 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Everybody,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Steve Metalitz just informed me that CSG cannot support Sam
> candidate.
> >>>>>> I am really for Sam and definitely don't like bringing
> those kind of
> >>>>>> news.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> we shouldn't wait for CSG to come with proposals and we
> should be more
> >>>>>> proactive in this regard.
> >>>>>> first thing is to agree about deadline to elect board
> member to impose
> >>>>>> some visibility. agree on election process. I don't know if
> they will
> >>>>>> propose to meet in London but I would like the NCSG PC to
> work on that
> >>>>>> before.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> looking to hear your comments.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rafik
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>>>>> From: *Metalitz, Steven* <met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>
> <mailto:met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>>>
> >>>>>> Date: 2014-05-31 6:11 GMT+09:00
> >>>>>> Subject: RE: FW: CSG call with Sam Lanfranco Transcription
> - 19 May
> >>>>>> 2014
> >>>>>> To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rafik,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I wanted to let you know that on our call today, CSG
> concluded that we
> >>>>>> cannot support Sam as a Board candidate at this time. We are
> >>>>>> continuing to explore further options for moving forward.
> I will let
> >>>>>> you know as soon as we have something further to propose.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Steve
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> *From:*Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>]
> >>>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, May 24, 2014 9:56 PM
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> *To:* Metalitz, Steven
> >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: FW: CSG call with Sam Lanfranco
> Transcription - 19
> >>>>>> May 2014
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks Steve, so we will wait then for the final decision.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rafik
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2014-05-24 4:01 GMT+09:00 Metalitz, Steven <met at msk.com
> <mailto:met at msk.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>>>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Rafik,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We had a CSG leadership call on this today and are
> undertaking further
> >>>>>> consultation within our constituencies on a couple of
> points. We are
> >>>>>> to meet again next Friday.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Steve
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> *From:*Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>]
> >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:56 PM
> >>>>>> *To:* Metalitz, Steven
> >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: FW: CSG call with Sam Lanfranco
> Transcription - 19
> >>>>>> May 2014
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Steve,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> is it possible to know when CSG will respond to us about Sam
> >>>>>> candidature?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rafik
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2014-05-21 9:53 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak
> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks Steve,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rafik
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2014-05-21 4:36 GMT+09:00 Metalitz, Steven <met at msk.com
> <mailto:met at msk.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>>>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rafik,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For circulation to NCSG.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Steve
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Nathalie Peregrine
> [mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
> <mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
> >>>>>> <mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
> <mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>>]
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:48 AM
> >>>>>> To: Rosette, Kristina; Metalitz, Steven; tony holmes
> >>>>>> (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com
> <mailto:tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:tonyarholmes at btinternet.com
> <mailto:tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>>); Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
> >>>>>> (Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de
> <mailto:Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de>
> >>>>>> <mailto:Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de
> <mailto:Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de>>);
> >>>>>> Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com
> <mailto:Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com
> <mailto:Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com>>; marilynscade at hotmail.com
> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>
> >>>>>> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com
> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>>; harris at cabase.org.ar
> <mailto:harris at cabase.org.ar>
> >>>>>> <mailto:harris at cabase.org.ar <mailto:harris at cabase.org.ar>>
> >>>>>> Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
> <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>
> >>>>>> Subject: CSG call with Sam Lanfranco Transcription - 19
> May 2014
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dear all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please find attached the transcript of the CSG call
> held with Sam
> >>>>>> Lanfranco on May 19th 2014.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kind regards
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Nathalie
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> > _______________________________________________
> > PC-NCSG mailing list
> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PC-NCSG mailing list
> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20140602/701f6480/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list