From rafik.dammak Thu Sep 3 17:02:31 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 23:02:31 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments Message-ID: Hi everyone, we will have to work and review in several comment with coming soon deadlines/ 1. RDS https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit 2. Accountability: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit 3. IANA stewardship proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit Amr should share soon drafts about: 1. Initial Report on Data & Metrics for Policy Making 2. Removal of Searchable Whois Service from .SHARP Registry Agreement 3. Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments?GNSO Policy & Implementation Recommendations We should also start working on coming weeks on : Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en We need to find a volunteer to start working on this. Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin Sat Sep 5 02:09:04 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 19:09:04 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55EA2490.9080205@mail.utoronto.ca> I have added a few bits at the end, specific comments on the text. Overall, I think the issues paper is good and relatively biased, but it pays not so much attention to the fact that privacy issues are as yet unresolved, except to say that we should pay attention to the input of the privacy commissioners and the dissent. Other than that, I defer to others on process....we need to be sure that we can raise any issues that come up, and not have them determined out of scope. Are we ready to wrap it up? If so, who is holding the pen? I would like to salute Marika for the excellent report, I think she did a great job summarizing this glorious mess. Cheers Stephanie Perrin PS I promised an annotated version of the EWG report....I will publish it on my blog as soon as it is done, but I have not had time to complete it as an input to this process, and I am not sure that would be appropriate anyway. On 2015-09-03 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi everyone, > > we will have to work and review in several comment with coming soon > deadlines/ > > 1. RDS > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit > 2. Accountability: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit > > 3. IANA stewardship proposal: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit > > > Amr should share soon drafts about: > > 1. Initial Report on Data & Metrics for Policy Making > 2. Removal of Searchable Whois Service from .SHARP Registry Agreement > 3. Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments?GNSO Policy & Implementation > Recommendations > > > We should also start working on coming weeks on : > Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures > https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en > We need to find a volunteer to start working on this. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin Sat Sep 5 03:25:31 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:25:31 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: <55EA2490.9080205@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <55EA2490.9080205@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <55EA367B.9060000@mail.utoronto.ca> Sorry, I meant UN-biased, in that first line, and I am talking about the RDS comments. SP On 2015-09-04 19:09, Stephanie Perrin wrote: > I have added a few bits at the end, specific comments on the text. > Overall, I think the issues paper is good and relatively biased, but > it pays not so much attention to the fact that privacy issues are as > yet unresolved, except to say that we should pay attention to the > input of the privacy commissioners and the dissent. Other than that, > I defer to others on process....we need to be sure that we can raise > any issues that come up, and not have them determined out of scope. > Are we ready to wrap it up? If so, who is holding the pen? I would > like to salute Marika for the excellent report, I think she did a > great job summarizing this glorious mess. > Cheers Stephanie Perrin > PS I promised an annotated version of the EWG report....I will publish > it on my blog as soon as it is done, but I have not had time to > complete it as an input to this process, and I am not sure that would > be appropriate anyway. > On 2015-09-03 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> we will have to work and review in several comment with coming soon >> deadlines/ >> >> 1. RDS >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit >> 2. Accountability: >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit >> >> 3. IANA stewardship proposal: >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit >> >> >> Amr should share soon drafts about: >> >> 1. Initial Report on Data & Metrics for Policy Making >> 2. Removal of Searchable Whois Service from .SHARP Registry Agreement >> 3. Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments?GNSO Policy & Implementation >> Recommendations >> >> >> We should also start working on coming weeks on : >> Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures >> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en >> We need to find a volunteer to start working on this. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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: From avri Sun Sep 6 02:59:38 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:59:38 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> Message-ID: <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> Hi, Just did a cleanup pass. PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? Chair, over to you. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing thanks avri On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi Avri, > > Thank you! > I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add > their edits/comments. > we should also receive other documents for other comments. > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: > > Hi, > > I have edited James' contribution into the doc. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to review and > consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. > > avri > > On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Thanks for this Avri! > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >>: > > > > > > PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to shepherd this > one. > > > > avri > > > > On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the Preliminary issues > > report . > > > As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that > includes > > my one > > > comment on this issue. > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > It is open for comment and for the suggested addition of other > > issues. > > > > > > I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this > document > > as a > > > NCSG comment before the deadline. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > avri > > > > > > --- > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > software. > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From joy Sun Sep 6 12:42:54 2015 From: joy (Joy Liddicoat) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 21:42:54 +1200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [SPAM]Re: Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> Message-ID: <8D3F67B5-F395-4FB7-B4FE-9A352C1A24FB@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> Thanks Avri this is great. I had already done a brief review and made a couple of suggestions. I am happy to support this Joy Liddicoat Sent from my phone > On 6/09/2015, at 11:59, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > Just did a cleanup pass. > PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? > > Chair, over to you. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > thanks > > avri > >> On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> Hi Avri, >> >> Thank you! >> I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add >> their edits/comments. >> we should also receive other documents for other comments. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have edited James' contribution into the doc. >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >> >> Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to review and >> consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. >> >> avri >> >>> On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> Thanks for this Avri! >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria > >>: >>> >>> >>> PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to shepherd this >> one. >>> >>> avri >>> >>>> On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the Preliminary issues >>> report . >>>> As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that >> includes >>> my one >>>> comment on this issue. >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >>>> >>>> It is open for comment and for the suggested addition of other >>> issues. >>>> >>>> I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this >> document >>> as a >>>> NCSG comment before the deadline. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> avri >>>> >>>> --- >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >> software. >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >> software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From rafik.dammak Sun Sep 6 12:58:02 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 18:58:02 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi , @Avri thanks for the work done. the draft was shared 10 days ago to the PC. Comments were resolved and document edited. We have few hours left and there was no objection. I think we can consider the comment as endorsed by the PC. Best, Rafik 2015-09-06 8:59 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria : > Hi, > > Just did a cleanup pass. > PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? > > Chair, over to you. > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > thanks > > avri > > On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > Hi Avri, > > > > Thank you! > > I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add > > their edits/comments. > > we should also receive other documents for other comments. > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >>: > > > > Hi, > > > > I have edited James' contribution into the doc. > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to review > and > > consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. > > > > avri > > > > On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > Thanks for this Avri! > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria > >>: > > > > > > > > > PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to shepherd this > > one. > > > > > > avri > > > > > > On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the Preliminary issues > > > report . > > > > As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that > > includes > > > my one > > > > comment on this issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > > > It is open for comment and for the suggested addition of > other > > > issues. > > > > > > > > I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this > > document > > > as a > > > > NCSG comment before the deadline. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > avri > > > > > > > > --- > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Sun Sep 6 14:50:40 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 13:50:40 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> Message-ID: <86CEC952-F6B8-4E6A-8840-E9D7E6EE2437@egyptig.org> Hi, I?m fine with the comment too. This comment has been in the works for a while, and with the deadline being midnight UTC tonight, I hope there are no objections to it. I would have liked to see more references in the issues report to work done on internationalised registration data, like the ?Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized Registration Data and Corresponding Model for gTLD Registries? and others. I guess that these are probably within scope having fed into the translation/transliteration of contact data PDP, which was included in the issues report. So, in the absence of objections, I hope we can submit this as an NCSG statement. Thanks. Amr PS: I?m having trouble viewing the google doc now, but it was working yesterday, and earlier this morning. > On Sep 6, 2015, at 11:58 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi , > > @Avri thanks for the work done. > the draft was shared 10 days ago to the PC. Comments were resolved and document edited. We have few hours left and there was no objection. I think we can consider the comment as endorsed by the PC. > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2015-09-06 8:59 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria : > Hi, > > Just did a cleanup pass. > PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? > > Chair, over to you. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > thanks > > avri > > On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > Hi Avri, > > > > Thank you! > > I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add > > their edits/comments. > > we should also receive other documents for other comments. > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: > > > > Hi, > > > > I have edited James' contribution into the doc. > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to review and > > consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. > > > > avri > > > > On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > Thanks for this Avri! > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria > >>: > > > > > > > > > PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to shepherd this > > one. > > > > > > avri > > > > > > On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the Preliminary issues > > > report . > > > > As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that > > includes > > > my one > > > > comment on this issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > > > It is open for comment and for the suggested addition of other > > > issues. > > > > > > > > I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this > > document > > > as a > > > > NCSG comment before the deadline. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > avri > > > > > > > > --- > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From avri Sun Sep 6 16:54:51 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 09:54:51 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> Message-ID: <55EC45AB.1080105@acm.org> Hi, I have accepted the last edits and removed all the temporary stuff - like brackets around the fact that it is a NCSG doc. avri On 06-Sep-15 05:58, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi , > > @Avri thanks for the work done. > the draft was shared 10 days ago to the PC. Comments were resolved and > document edited. We have few hours left and there was no objection. I > think we can consider the comment as endorsed by the PC. > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2015-09-06 8:59 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: > > Hi, > > Just did a cleanup pass. > PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? > > Chair, over to you. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > thanks > > avri > > On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > Hi Avri, > > > > Thank you! > > I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add > > their edits/comments. > > we should also receive other documents for other comments. > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >>: > > > > Hi, > > > > I have edited James' contribution into the doc. > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to > review and > > consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. > > > > avri > > > > On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > Thanks for this Avri! > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria > > > > >>>: > > > > > > > > > PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to > shepherd this > > one. > > > > > > avri > > > > > > On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the > Preliminary issues > > > report . > > > > As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that > > includes > > > my one > > > > comment on this issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > > > It is open for comment and for the suggested > addition of other > > > issues. > > > > > > > > I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this > > document > > > as a > > > > NCSG comment before the deadline. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > avri > > > > > > > > --- > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast > antivirus > > software. > > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > >> > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > > >> > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From joy Sun Sep 6 22:34:16 2015 From: joy (Joy Liddicoat) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 07:34:16 +1200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [SPAM]Re: Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: <55EC45AB.1080105@acm.org> References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> <55EC45AB.1080105@acm.org> Message-ID: Thanks Avri and Rafik, As mentioned, I endorse this comment, Joy Liddicoat Sent from my phone > On 7/09/2015, at 01:54, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > I have accepted the last edits and removed all the temporary stuff - > like brackets around the fact that it is a NCSG doc. > > avri > > >> On 06-Sep-15 05:58, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> Hi , >> >> @Avri thanks for the work done. >> the draft was shared 10 days ago to the PC. Comments were resolved and >> document edited. We have few hours left and there was no objection. I >> think we can consider the comment as endorsed by the PC. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> 2015-09-06 8:59 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: >> >> Hi, >> >> Just did a cleanup pass. >> PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? >> >> Chair, over to you. >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> >>> On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> >>> Hi Avri, >>> >>> Thank you! >>> I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add >>> their edits/comments. >>> we should also receive other documents for other comments. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria > >>: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have edited James' contribution into the doc. >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >>> >>> Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to >> review and >>> consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. >>> >>> avri >>> >>>> On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>>> Thanks for this Avri! >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria > >>> > >> > >>>: >>>> >>>> >>>> PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to >> shepherd this >>> one. >>>> >>>> avri >>>> >>>>> On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the >> Preliminary issues >>>> report . >>>>> As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that >>> includes >>>> my one >>>>> comment on this issue. >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >>>>> >>>>> It is open for comment and for the suggested >> addition of other >>>> issues. >>>>> >>>>> I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this >>> document >>>> as a >>>>> NCSG comment before the deadline. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> avri >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast >> antivirus >>> software. >>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > >>> >> >> >>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>>> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >>> software. >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > >>> >> >> >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >> software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From stephanie.perrin Sun Sep 6 22:55:46 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 15:55:46 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Next Gen RDS comments on preliminary issues report In-Reply-To: <86CEC952-F6B8-4E6A-8840-E9D7E6EE2437@egyptig.org> References: <55DDD8C9.1050303@acm.org> <55DDED0B.2050902@acm.org> <55DF3AC7.9000009@acm.org> <55EB81EA.5070305@acm.org> <86CEC952-F6B8-4E6A-8840-E9D7E6EE2437@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <55EC9A42.4060207@mail.utoronto.ca> It is a good point AMr, they were determined to be out of scope for the EWG (ie someone else is already dealing with that). SP On 2015-09-06 7:50, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > I?m fine with the comment too. This comment has been in the works for a while, and with the deadline being midnight UTC tonight, I hope there are no objections to it. > > I would have liked to see more references in the issues report to work done on internationalised registration data, like the ?Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized Registration Data and Corresponding Model for gTLD Registries? and others. I guess that these are probably within scope having fed into the translation/transliteration of contact data PDP, which was included in the issues report. > > So, in the absence of objections, I hope we can submit this as an NCSG statement. > > Thanks. > > Amr > > PS: I?m having trouble viewing the google doc now, but it was working yesterday, and earlier this morning. > >> On Sep 6, 2015, at 11:58 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> Hi , >> >> @Avri thanks for the work done. >> the draft was shared 10 days ago to the PC. Comments were resolved and document edited. We have few hours left and there was no objection. I think we can consider the comment as endorsed by the PC. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> 2015-09-06 8:59 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria : >> Hi, >> >> Just did a cleanup pass. >> PC needs to decide by tomorrow whether it s a NCSG submission? >> >> Chair, over to you. >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> >> On 27-Aug-15 20:29, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> Hi Avri, >>> >>> Thank you! >>> I would suggest that PC members start checking the document and add >>> their edits/comments. >>> we should also receive other documents for other comments. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> 2015-08-28 1:28 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have edited James' contribution into the doc. >>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >>> >>> Should try to close the doc next week so the PC has time to review and >>> consider. So now is a good time to add stuff. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> On 26-Aug-15 21:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> > Thanks for this Avri! >>> > >>> > Rafik >>> > >>> > 2015-08-27 1:44 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >> >>: >>> > >>> > >>> > PS: I guess at this point I am volunteering to shepherd this >>> one. >>> > >>> > avri >>> > >>> > On 26-Aug-15 11:18, Avri Doria wrote: >>> > > Hi, >>> > > >>> > > Sept 6 is the deadline for comments on the Preliminary issues >>> > report . >>> > > As I mentioned earlier, I have created a drive doc that >>> includes >>> > my one >>> > > comment on this issue. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit?usp=sharing >>> > > >>> > > It is open for comment and for the suggested addition of other >>> > issues. >>> > > >>> > > I plan to ask the NCSG Policy committee to approve this >>> document >>> > as a >>> > > NCSG comment before the deadline. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks >>> > > >>> > > avri >>> > > >>> > > --- >>> > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >>> software. >>> > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> > >>> > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > --- >>> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >>> software. >>> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> > >>> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> >>> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 From rafik.dammak Mon Sep 7 03:58:11 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 09:58:11 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi everyone, it i just to go through the comments, I submitted our comment on RDS. the next comment is for ICG proposal and it is due for 8th Sept. there is the deadline for data and metrics for policy-making but we didn't get any draft yet. @Amr is this still with you?can you share the draft? can we get someone for the new gTLD subsequent procedures, we had long discussion about in the last NCSG confcall. Best, Rafik 2015-09-03 23:02 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak : > Hi everyone, > > we will have to work and review in several comment with coming soon > deadlines/ > > > 1. RDS > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lGzq-cEDkdRstgh6w930Vhb-TeQGkhH2wrNrs36kt4s/edit > 2. Accountability: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit > > 3. IANA stewardship proposal: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit > > > Amr should share soon drafts about: > > 1. Initial Report on Data & Metrics for Policy Making > 2. Removal of Searchable Whois Service from .SHARP Registry Agreement > 3. Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments?GNSO Policy & Implementation > Recommendations > > > We should also start working on coming weeks on : > Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures > https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en > We need to find a volunteer to start working on this. > > Best, > > Rafik > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Tue Sep 8 02:11:07 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 19:11:07 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: > # IANA stewardship > proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty sure not everyone will be happy with my issues. I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short statement on that issue. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 8 05:00:21 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 11:00:21 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> References: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi Avri, Thank you very much, I will try to solve the comments and do the formatting of the document. looking for other PC member input. we have to submit the comment in 8th Sept 23:59 so we have less than 24hours Best Regards, Rafik 2015-09-08 8:11 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria : > > > On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > # IANA stewardship > > proposal: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit > > Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty sure not > everyone will be happy with my issues. > > I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite > methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had > cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short statement > on that issue. > > avri > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mshears Tue Sep 8 10:14:58 2015 From: mshears (Matthew Shears) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:14:58 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> References: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> Message-ID: <55EE8AF2.7060107@cdt.org> I am comfortable with your edits Avri. On 08/09/2015 00:11, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> # IANA stewardship >> proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit > Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty sure not > everyone will be happy with my issues. > > I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite > methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had > cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short statement > on that issue. > > avri > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org + 44 771 247 2987 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 8 10:17:05 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 16:17:05 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <29F74BFF-A6B4-4791-ADC9-8FCFFD52F97A@gmail.com> <0AE89BF2-F4B3-4C32-90B5-BD391BF680B1@toast.net> <4839F999-4FA5-4454-9260-A03BBFEDC6D6@gmail.com> <55CA152F.1000307@mail.utoronto.ca> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> Message-ID: Hi, with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. can I respond to CSG that: *we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they don't support vote against in first round.* *we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with the alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach* *Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered together.* we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if how we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu quo? Best, Rafik 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat : > Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that > verifies Avri's point or not ... > Cheers > Joy > > -----Original Message----- > From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Avri > Doria > Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. > To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org > Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just > what we all have time for > > We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is > probably what we will do in the end anyway. > > avri > > > On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > can we make some progress here? > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr > >: > > > > Hi, > > > > It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on > > how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the > > urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a > > vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to > > select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. > > > > Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding > > the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on > > whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask > > to modify it. > > > > I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I > > have left any out, please raise them again: > > > > 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. > > > > 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along > > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. > > > > 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for > > procedure. > > > > The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying > > to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we > > could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond > > to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with > > ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he > > communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason > > for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them > > agreeable to the concept. > > > > So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward > > with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or > > another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Amr > > > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Ed, > > > > > > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" > > wrote: > > > Hi Rafik, > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying. > > > > > > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on > > surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's > > accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of > > the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) > > > > > > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact > > the NCPH > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Ed, > > > > > > > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. > > > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris > > a ?crit : > > > >> > > > >> No objection here. > > > >> > > > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so > > we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with this. > > > >> > > > >> Ed > > > >> > > > >> Sent from my iPhone > > > >> > > > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Hi, > > > >>> > > > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, > > we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a > > candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much > > what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so > > clearly BTW. :) > > > >>> > > > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little > > dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of > > the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it > > won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, > > we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no > > need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we > > use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to > > Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. > > > >>> > > > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks. > > > >>> > > > >>> Amr > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria > > wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Hi, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical > > difference between > > > >>>> the two methods is not apparent > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated > > > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind > > > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind > > > >>>> > > > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither > > gets the > > > >>>> supermajority needed. > > > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs > > B2 and > > > >>>> someone might get the supermajority > > > >>>> > > > >>>> And if you need to go the third round > > > >>>> > > > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins > > > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might > > actually get > > > >>>> supermajority. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly > > ended up > > > >>>> deadlocked. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> good luck > > > >>>> > > > >>>> avri > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > > >>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the > > unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most > > desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of > > just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t > > really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase > > and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council > > chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever > > method we agree ultimately end up using. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Amr > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris > > > wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am > > largely attempting to understand the issues and processes > > involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues > > like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where > > Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to > > eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although > > I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting > > Avri's position to the extent it matters. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit > > currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute > > resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is > > chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen > > by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Ed > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria > > wrote: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> avri > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about > > the response to > > > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this > > year only, > > > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working > > to let them > > > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in > > NCPH list . > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will > conduct > > > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Best, > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Rafik > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >>: > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on > > this year?s > > > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG > > that we > > > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would > > work. I hope > > > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG > > > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re > > not using > > > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? > > > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there > > but the > > > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal > > from the > > > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with > > this year?s election, our agreement to a formal > > > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after > > we hold a > > > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really > > do need to > > > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with > > our NCPH > > > >>>>>>>> counterparts. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes > > and keep > > > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will > > take the > > > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some > > work on how > > > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more > > systematic manner. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Rafik > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Amr > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak > > > >>>>>>>> > > >> > > wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the > > answer > > > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can > > accept the > > > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. the > > > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to > > discuss > > > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their > > commitments, > > > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. > > > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the > > what is > > > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we > > should agree > > > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss > > that later. > > > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake > > > > > >>>>>>>> >>: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans > > to kick > > > >>>>>>>> back more. > > > >>>>>>>>>> Bill > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of > > our best > > > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us > > newbies running > > > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling > > myself a newbie...) > > > >>>>>>>>>>> SP > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris > > > >>>>>>>> > > >> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable > > to more > > > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> --- > > > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast > > antivirus software. > > > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>> 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 > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >> 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 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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: From wjdrake Tue Sep 8 11:16:30 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:16:30 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: <55EE8AF2.7060107@cdt.org> References: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> <55EE8AF2.7060107@cdt.org> Message-ID: <644BC8E1-5454-42AE-BF0F-48A7AB83817F@gmail.com> I?m trying to understand what I?m reading. Who is the masteroftherealm who struck the AC language? thanks Bill > On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Matthew Shears wrote: > > I am comfortable with your edits Avri. > > On 08/09/2015 00:11, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> # IANA stewardship >>> proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit >> Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty sure not >> everyone will be happy with my issues. >> >> I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite >> methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had >> cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short statement >> on that issue. >> >> avri >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -- > > Matthew Shears > Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > Center for Democracy & Technology > mshears at cdt.org > + 44 771 247 2987 > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg ********************************************************* William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, ICANN, www.ncuc.org william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), www.williamdrake.org Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q ********************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wjdrake Tue Sep 8 11:20:52 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:20:52 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <29F74BFF-A6B4-4791-ADC9-8FCFFD52F97A@gmail.com> <0AE89BF2-F4B3-4C32-90B5-BD391BF680B1@toast.net> <4839F999-4FA5-4454-9260-A03BBFEDC6D6@gmail.com> <55CA152F.1000307@mail.utoronto.ca> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> Message-ID: <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> Hi > On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi, > > with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. > can I respond to CSG that: > we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they don't support vote against in first round. > we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with the alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach > Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered together. Makes sense to me > > we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if how we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu quo? Yes, and I also think it?d be nice if the NCPH started to communicate again on list, conversations have all moved into a private Cc, which doesn?t sit well. Bill > > > > 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat >: > Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that > verifies Avri's point or not ... > Cheers > Joy > > -----Original Message----- > From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria > Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. > To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org > Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just > what we all have time for > > We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is > probably what we will do in the end anyway. > > avri > > > On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > can we make some progress here? > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr > > >>: > > > > Hi, > > > > It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on > > how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the > > urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a > > vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to > > select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. > > > > Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding > > the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on > > whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask > > to modify it. > > > > I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I > > have left any out, please raise them again: > > > > 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. > > > > 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along > > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. > > > > 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for > > procedure. > > > > The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying > > to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we > > could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond > > to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with > > ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he > > communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason > > for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them > > agreeable to the concept. > > > > So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward > > with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or > > another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Amr > > > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak > > >> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Ed, > > > > > > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" > > >> wrote: > > > Hi Rafik, > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying. > > > > > > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on > > surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's > > accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of > > the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) > > > > > > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact > > the NCPH > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Ed, > > > > > > > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. > > > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris > > >> a ?crit : > > > >> > > > >> No objection here. > > > >> > > > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so > > we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with this. > > > >> > > > >> Ed > > > >> > > > >> Sent from my iPhone > > > >> > > > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr > > >> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Hi, > > > >>> > > > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, > > we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a > > candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much > > what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so > > clearly BTW. :) > > > >>> > > > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little > > dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of > > the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it > > won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, > > we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no > > need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we > > use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to > > Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. > > > >>> > > > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks. > > > >>> > > > >>> Amr > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria > > >> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Hi, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical > > difference between > > > >>>> the two methods is not apparent > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated > > > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind > > > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind > > > >>>> > > > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither > > gets the > > > >>>> supermajority needed. > > > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs > > B2 and > > > >>>> someone might get the supermajority > > > >>>> > > > >>>> And if you need to go the third round > > > >>>> > > > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins > > > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might > > actually get > > > >>>> supermajority. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly > > ended up > > > >>>> deadlocked. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> good luck > > > >>>> > > > >>>> avri > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > > >>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the > > unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most > > desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of > > just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t > > really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase > > and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council > > chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever > > method we agree ultimately end up using. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Amr > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris > > >> wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am > > largely attempting to understand the issues and processes > > involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues > > like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where > > Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to > > eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although > > I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting > > Avri's position to the extent it matters. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit > > currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute > > resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is > > chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen > > by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Ed > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria > > >> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> avri > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about > > the response to > > > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this > > year only, > > > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working > > to let them > > > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in > > NCPH list . > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will conduct > > > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Best, > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Rafik > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>: > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on > > this year?s > > > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG > > that we > > > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would > > work. I hope > > > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG > > > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re > > not using > > > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? > > > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there > > but the > > > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal > > from the > > > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with > > this year?s election, our agreement to a formal > > > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after > > we hold a > > > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really > > do need to > > > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with > > our NCPH > > > >>>>>>>> counterparts. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes > > and keep > > > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will > > take the > > > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some > > work on how > > > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more > > systematic manner. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Rafik > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Amr > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>> > > wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the > > answer > > > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can > > accept the > > > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. the > > > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to > > discuss > > > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their > > commitments, > > > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. > > > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the > > what is > > > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we > > should agree > > > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss > > that later. > > > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake > > > > > > >>>>>>>> >>>: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans > > to kick > > > >>>>>>>> back more. > > > >>>>>>>>>> Bill > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of > > our best > > > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us > > newbies running > > > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling > > myself a newbie...) > > > >>>>>>>>>>> SP > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable > > to more > > > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> --- > > > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast > > antivirus software. > > > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > > software. > > > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >>>> 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 > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > > > >> 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 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg ********************************************************* William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, ICANN, www.ncuc.org william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), www.williamdrake.org Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q ********************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 8 11:39:09 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 17:39:09 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: <644BC8E1-5454-42AE-BF0F-48A7AB83817F@gmail.com> References: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> <55EE8AF2.7060107@cdt.org> <644BC8E1-5454-42AE-BF0F-48A7AB83817F@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Bill, I have no idea who is, but I am not sure that the vote weight is relevant to the IANA stewardship proposal unless I am missing something. Rafik 2015-09-08 17:16 GMT+09:00 William Drake : > I?m trying to understand what I?m reading. Who is the masteroftherealm > who struck the AC language? > > thanks > > Bill > > > On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Matthew Shears wrote: > > I am comfortable with your edits Avri. > > On 08/09/2015 00:11, Avri Doria wrote: > > > On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > # IANA stewardship > proposal: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit > > Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty sure not > everyone will be happy with my issues. > > I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite > methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had > cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short statement > on that issue. > > avri > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > -- > > Matthew Shears > Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > Center for Democracy & Technology > mshears at cdt.org > + 44 771 247 2987 > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > ********************************************************* > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), > www.williamdrake.org > *Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap *http://goo.gl/sRR01q > ********************************************************* > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mshears Tue Sep 8 11:42:53 2015 From: mshears (Matthew Shears) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 09:42:53 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> <55EE8AF2.7060107@cdt.org> <644BC8E1-5454-42AE-BF0F-48A7AB83817F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <55EE9F8D.5050504@cdt.org> Well in so far as the GAC potentially voting (although it is unlikely) may be seen as empowering governments it is of importance to the transition but not in a narrow sense to the ICG's proposal I suppose. On 08/09/2015 09:39, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi Bill, > > I have no idea who is, but I am not sure that the vote weight is > relevant to the IANA stewardship proposal unless I am missing something. > > Rafik > > 2015-09-08 17:16 GMT+09:00 William Drake >: > > I?m trying to understand what I?m reading. Who is the > masteroftherealm who struck the AC language? > > thanks > > Bill > > >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Matthew Shears > > wrote: >> >> I am comfortable with your edits Avri. >> >> On 08/09/2015 00:11, Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>> On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>>> # IANA stewardship >>>> proposal: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit >>> Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty >>> sure not >>> everyone will be happy with my issues. >>> >>> I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite >>> methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had >>> cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short >>> statement >>> on that issue. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> -- >> >> Matthew Shears >> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights >> Center for Democracy & Technology >> mshears at cdt.org >> + 44 771 247 2987 >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > ********************************************************* > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), > wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), > www.williamdrake.org > /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q > ********************************************************* > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org + 44 771 247 2987 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joy Tue Sep 8 12:09:01 2015 From: joy (Joy Liddicoat) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 21:09:01 +1200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [SPAM]Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <29F74BFF-A6B4-4791-ADC9-8FCFFD52F97A@gmail.com> <0AE89BF2-F4B3-4C32-90B5-BD391BF680B1@toast.net> <4839F999-4FA5-4454-9260-A03BBFEDC6D6@gmail.com> <55CA152F.1000307@mail.utoronto.ca> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0DFCEF5F-15BF-4B59-A55C-6C878D6592E0@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> Thanks Rafik and Bill, As already mentioned I am happy with that approach Joy Liddicoat Sent from my phone > On 8/09/2015, at 20:20, William Drake wrote: > > Hi > >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. >> can I respond to CSG that: >> we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they don't support vote against in first round. >> we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with the alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach >> Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered together. > > Makes sense to me >> >> we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if how we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu quo? > > Yes, and I also think it?d be nice if the NCPH started to communicate again on list, conversations have all moved into a private Cc, which doesn?t sit well. > > Bill > > > > >> >> >> >> 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat : >>> Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that >>> verifies Avri's point or not ... >>> Cheers >>> Joy >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria >>> Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. >>> To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org >>> Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just >>> what we all have time for >>> >>> We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is >>> probably what we will do in the end anyway. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> > Hi everyone, >>> > >>> > can we make some progress here? >>> > >>> > Best, >>> > >>> > Rafik >>> > >>> > 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr >> > >: >>> > >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on >>> > how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the >>> > urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a >>> > vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to >>> > select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. >>> > >>> > Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding >>> > the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on >>> > whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask >>> > to modify it. >>> > >>> > I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I >>> > have left any out, please raise them again: >>> > >>> > 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. >>> > >>> > 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along >>> > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. >>> > >>> > 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for >>> > procedure. >>> > >>> > The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying >>> > to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we >>> > could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond >>> > to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with >>> > ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he >>> > communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason >>> > for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them >>> > agreeable to the concept. >>> > >>> > So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward >>> > with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or >>> > another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. >>> > >>> > Thanks. >>> > >>> > Amr >>> > >>> > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > Hi Ed, >>> > > >>> > > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) >>> > > >>> > > Rafik >>> > > >>> > > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" >> > > wrote: >>> > > Hi Rafik, >>> > > >>> > > Thanks for clarifying. >>> > > >>> > > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on >>> > surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's >>> > accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of >>> > the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) >>> > > >>> > > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact >>> > the NCPH >>> > > >>> > > Sent from my iPhone >>> > > >>> > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik >> > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > Hi Ed, >>> > > > >>> > > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. >>> > > > >>> > > > Rafik >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris >> > > a ?crit : >>> > > >> >>> > > >> No objection here. >>> > > >> >>> > > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so >>> > we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with this. >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Ed >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Sent from my iPhone >>> > > >> >>> > > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr >> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> Hi, >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, >>> > we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a >>> > candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much >>> > what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so >>> > clearly BTW. :) >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little >>> > dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of >>> > the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it >>> > won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, >>> > we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no >>> > need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we >>> > use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to >>> > Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> Thanks. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> Amr >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria >> > > wrote: >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> Hi, >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical >>> > difference between >>> > > >>>> the two methods is not apparent >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated >>> > > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind >>> > > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither >>> > gets the >>> > > >>>> supermajority needed. >>> > > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs >>> > B2 and >>> > > >>>> someone might get the supermajority >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> And if you need to go the third round >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins >>> > > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might >>> > actually get >>> > > >>>> supermajority. >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly >>> > ended up >>> > > >>>> deadlocked. >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> good luck >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> avri >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>> > > >>>>> Hi, >>> > > >>>>> >>> > > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the >>> > unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most >>> > desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of >>> > just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t >>> > really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase >>> > and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council >>> > chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever >>> > method we agree ultimately end up using. >>> > > >>>>> >>> > > >>>>> Thanks. >>> > > >>>>> >>> > > >>>>> Amr >>> > > >>>>> >>> > > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am >>> > largely attempting to understand the issues and processes >>> > involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues >>> > like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where >>> > Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to >>> > eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although >>> > I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting >>> > Avri's position to the extent it matters. >>> > > >>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit >>> > currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute >>> > resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is >>> > chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen >>> > by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. >>> > > >>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>> Ed >>> > > >>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>> > > >>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria >> > > wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> avri >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about >>> > the response to >>> > > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this >>> > year only, >>> > > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working >>> > to let them >>> > > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in >>> > NCPH list . >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will conduct >>> > > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> Best, >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak >>> > >>> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >>: >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> Hi, >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" >>> > >>> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>> > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on >>> > this year?s >>> > > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG >>> > that we >>> > > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would >>> > work. I hope >>> > > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG >>> > > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re >>> > not using >>> > > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? >>> > > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there >>> > but the >>> > > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal >>> > from the >>> > > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with >>> > this year?s election, our agreement to a formal >>> > > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after >>> > we hold a >>> > > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really >>> > do need to >>> > > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with >>> > our NCPH >>> > > >>>>>>>> counterparts. >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes >>> > and keep >>> > > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will >>> > take the >>> > > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some >>> > work on how >>> > > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more >>> > systematic manner. >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>> > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>> Amr >>> > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > >> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the >>> > answer >>> > > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can >>> > accept the >>> > > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. the >>> > > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to >>> > discuss >>> > > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their >>> > commitments, >>> > > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the >>> > what is >>> > > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we >>> > should agree >>> > > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss >>> > that later. >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake >>> > >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>: >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans >>> > to kick >>> > > >>>>>>>> back more. >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Bill >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin >>> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >>> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of >>> > our best >>> > > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us >>> > newbies running >>> > > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling >>> > myself a newbie...) >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> SP >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > >> wrote: >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable >>> > to more >>> > > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> > > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> --- >>> > > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast >>> > antivirus software. >>> > > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> >>> > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > >>>>>>> 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 >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> --- >>> > > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >>> > software. >>> > > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > >>>> 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 >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > >> 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 >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > ********************************************************* > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), > www.williamdrake.org > Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q > ********************************************************* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Tue Sep 8 15:30:17 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 14:30:17 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <29F74BFF-A6B4-4791-ADC9-8FCFFD52F97A@gmail.com> <0AE89BF2-F4B3-4C32-90B5-BD391BF680B1@toast.net> <4839F999-4FA5-4454-9260-A03BBFEDC6D6@gmail.com> <55CA152F.1000307@mail.utoronto.ca> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, Agree with Bill and Rafik, and very much share Bill?s sentiments regarding the use of the NCPH list. Thanks. Amr > On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:20 AM, William Drake wrote: > > Hi > >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. >> can I respond to CSG that: >> we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they don't support vote against in first round. >> we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with the alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach >> Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered together. > > Makes sense to me >> >> we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if how we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu quo? > > Yes, and I also think it?d be nice if the NCPH started to communicate again on list, conversations have all moved into a private Cc, which doesn?t sit well. > > Bill > > > > >> >> >> >> 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat : >> Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that >> verifies Avri's point or not ... >> Cheers >> Joy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria >> Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. >> To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org >> Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just >> what we all have time for >> >> We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is >> probably what we will do in the end anyway. >> >> avri >> >> >> On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > can we make some progress here? >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > Rafik >> > >> > 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr > > >: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on >> > how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the >> > urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a >> > vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to >> > select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. >> > >> > Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding >> > the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on >> > whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask >> > to modify it. >> > >> > I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I >> > have left any out, please raise them again: >> > >> > 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. >> > >> > 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along >> > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. >> > >> > 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for >> > procedure. >> > >> > The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying >> > to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we >> > could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond >> > to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with >> > ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he >> > communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason >> > for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them >> > agreeable to the concept. >> > >> > So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward >> > with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or >> > another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Amr >> > >> > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Ed, >> > > >> > > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) >> > > >> > > Rafik >> > > >> > > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" > > > wrote: >> > > Hi Rafik, >> > > >> > > Thanks for clarifying. >> > > >> > > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on >> > surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's >> > accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of >> > the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) >> > > >> > > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact >> > the NCPH >> > > >> > > Sent from my iPhone >> > > >> > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Hi Ed, >> > > > >> > > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. >> > > > >> > > > Rafik >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris > > > a ?crit : >> > > >> >> > > >> No objection here. >> > > >> >> > > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so >> > we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with this. >> > > >> >> > > >> Ed >> > > >> >> > > >> Sent from my iPhone >> > > >> >> > > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr > > > wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Hi, >> > > >>> >> > > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, >> > we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a >> > candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much >> > what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so >> > clearly BTW. :) >> > > >>> >> > > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little >> > dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of >> > the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it >> > won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, >> > we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no >> > need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we >> > use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to >> > Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Thanks. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Amr >> > > >>> >> > > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria > > > wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> Hi, >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical >> > difference between >> > > >>>> the two methods is not apparent >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated >> > > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind >> > > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither >> > gets the >> > > >>>> supermajority needed. >> > > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs >> > B2 and >> > > >>>> someone might get the supermajority >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> And if you need to go the third round >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins >> > > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might >> > actually get >> > > >>>> supermajority. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly >> > ended up >> > > >>>> deadlocked. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> good luck >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> avri >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> > > >>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the >> > unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most >> > desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of >> > just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t >> > really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase >> > and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council >> > chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever >> > method we agree ultimately end up using. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Thanks. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Amr >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris >> > > wrote: >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am >> > largely attempting to understand the issues and processes >> > involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues >> > like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where >> > Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to >> > eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although >> > I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting >> > Avri's position to the extent it matters. >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit >> > currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute >> > resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is >> > chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen >> > by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> Ed >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria > > > wrote: >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> avri >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about >> > the response to >> > > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this >> > year only, >> > > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working >> > to let them >> > > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in >> > NCPH list . >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will conduct >> > > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Best, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak >> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>: >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" >> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on >> > this year?s >> > > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG >> > that we >> > > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would >> > work. I hope >> > > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG >> > > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re >> > not using >> > > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? >> > > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there >> > but the >> > > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal >> > from the >> > > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with >> > this year?s election, our agreement to a formal >> > > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after >> > we hold a >> > > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really >> > do need to >> > > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with >> > our NCPH >> > > >>>>>>>> counterparts. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes >> > and keep >> > > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will >> > take the >> > > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some >> > work on how >> > > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more >> > systematic manner. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Amr >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> >> > wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the >> > answer >> > > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can >> > accept the >> > > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. the >> > > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to >> > discuss >> > > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their >> > commitments, >> > > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the >> > what is >> > > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we >> > should agree >> > > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss >> > that later. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake >> > >> > > >>>>>>>> >>: >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans >> > to kick >> > > >>>>>>>> back more. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Bill >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of >> > our best >> > > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us >> > newbies running >> > > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling >> > myself a newbie...) >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> SP >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable >> > to more >> > > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 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 >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> --- >> > > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast >> > antivirus software. >> > > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>>>>> 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 >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> --- >> > > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >> > software. >> > > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>> 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 >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> _______________________________________________ >> > > >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >> 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PC-NCSG mailing list >> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > ********************************************************* > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), > www.williamdrake.org > Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q > ********************************************************* > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From aelsadr Tue Sep 8 15:35:53 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 14:35:53 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, > On Sep 7, 2015, at 2:58 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > [SNIP] > there is the deadline for data and metrics for policy-making but we didn't get any draft yet. @Amr is this still with you?can you share the draft? I?m terribly sorry about being so behind on my tasks. My schedule has been terribly chaotic this past month, and will probably continue like this for some time. I had been working on a comment for this report, but only finished it a couple of hours before the deadline, so I went ahead and submitted it in my individual capacity. Apologies to all once again. My comment is posted here: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-data-metrics-29jul15/msg00007.html Thanks. Amr From avri Tue Sep 8 15:23:06 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:23:06 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: <644BC8E1-5454-42AE-BF0F-48A7AB83817F@gmail.com> References: <55EE198B.6070107@acm.org> <55EE8AF2.7060107@cdt.org> <644BC8E1-5454-42AE-BF0F-48A7AB83817F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <55EED32A.6010007@acm.org> I suggested deleting it. as for who changed it to strike through, don't know. i think it is bad enough we are putting that langauge in the CCWG comments, i see no reason for including it in the ICG comments. avri On 08-Sep-15 04:16, William Drake wrote: > I?m trying to understand what I?m reading. Who is the > masteroftherealm who struck the AC language? > > thanks > > Bill > > >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Matthew Shears > > wrote: >> >> I am comfortable with your edits Avri. >> >> On 08/09/2015 00:11, Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>> On 03-Sep-15 10:02, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>>> # IANA stewardship >>>> proposal: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wO_tu-liqEqzlMSm_NnGD4_BME7f7Fhg_Z7d1lwYBc/edit >>> Know it is late but I made a few edits in suggest mode. Pretty sure not >>> everyone will be happy with my issues. >>> >>> I did not add my lament about the dangers of the ICG tripartite >>> methodology and my belief that the model would be stronger had >>> cooperation been a factor. Will probably put in my own short statement >>> on that issue. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> -- >> >> Matthew Shears >> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights >> Center for Democracy & Technology >> mshears at cdt.org >> + 44 771 247 2987 >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > ********************************************************* > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > william.drake at uzh.ch > (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com > (lists), > www.williamdrake.org > /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q > ********************************************************* > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From avri Tue Sep 8 15:26:47 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:26:47 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> Message-ID: <55EED407.2020109@acm.org> as i said before, we always surrender to them, i see no reason not to do so again this time. avri On 08-Sep-15 08:30, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > Agree with Bill and Rafik, and very much share Bill?s sentiments regarding the use of the NCPH list. > > Thanks. > > Amr > >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:20 AM, William Drake wrote: >> >> Hi >> >>> On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. >>> can I respond to CSG that: >>> we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they don't support vote against in first round. >>> we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with the alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach >>> Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered together. >> Makes sense to me >>> we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if how we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu quo? >> Yes, and I also think it?d be nice if the NCPH started to communicate again on list, conversations have all moved into a private Cc, which doesn?t sit well. >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat : >>> Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that >>> verifies Avri's point or not ... >>> Cheers >>> Joy >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria >>> Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. >>> To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org >>> Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just >>> what we all have time for >>> >>> We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is >>> probably what we will do in the end anyway. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> can we make some progress here? >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr >>> >: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on >>>> how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the >>>> urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a >>>> vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to >>>> select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. >>>> >>>> Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding >>>> the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on >>>> whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask >>>> to modify it. >>>> >>>> I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I >>>> have left any out, please raise them again: >>>> >>>> 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. >>>> >>>> 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along >>>> with a potential chair, they should be considered together. >>>> >>>> 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for >>>> procedure. >>>> >>>> The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying >>>> to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we >>>> could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond >>>> to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with >>>> ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he >>>> communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason >>>> for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them >>>> agreeable to the concept. >>>> >>>> So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward >>>> with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or >>>> another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Amr >>>> >>>> > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak >>>> > wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hi Ed, >>>> > >>>> > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) >>>> > >>>> > Rafik >>>> > >>>> > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" >>> > wrote: >>>> > Hi Rafik, >>>> > >>>> > Thanks for clarifying. >>>> > >>>> > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on >>>> surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's >>>> accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of >>>> the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) >>>> > >>>> > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact >>>> the NCPH >>>> > >>>> > Sent from my iPhone >>>> > >>>> > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik >>> > wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > Hi Ed, >>>> > > >>>> > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. >>>> > > >>>> > > Rafik >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris >>> > a ?crit : >>>> > >> >>>> > >> No objection here. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so >>>> we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with this. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Ed >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Sent from my iPhone >>>> > >> >>>> > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr >>> > wrote: >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> Hi, >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, >>>> we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a >>>> candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much >>>> what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so >>>> clearly BTW. :) >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little >>>> dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of >>>> the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it >>>> won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, >>>> we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no >>>> need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we >>>> use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to >>>> Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> Thanks. >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> Amr >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria >>> > wrote: >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> Hi, >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical >>>> difference between >>>> > >>>> the two methods is not apparent >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated >>>> > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind >>>> > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither >>>> gets the >>>> > >>>> supermajority needed. >>>> > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs >>>> B2 and >>>> > >>>> someone might get the supermajority >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> And if you need to go the third round >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins >>>> > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might >>>> actually get >>>> > >>>> supermajority. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly >>>> ended up >>>> > >>>> deadlocked. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> good luck >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> avri >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>>> > >>>>> Hi, >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the >>>> unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most >>>> desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of >>>> just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t >>>> really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase >>>> and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council >>>> chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever >>>> method we agree ultimately end up using. >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Thanks. >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Amr >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris >>>> > wrote: >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am >>>> largely attempting to understand the issues and processes >>>> involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues >>>> like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where >>>> Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to >>>> eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although >>>> I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting >>>> Avri's position to the extent it matters. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit >>>> currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute >>>> resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is >>>> chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen >>>> by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Ed >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria >>> > wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> avri >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about >>>> the response to >>>> > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this >>>> year only, >>>> > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working >>>> to let them >>>> > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in >>>> NCPH list . >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will conduct >>>> > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Best, >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Rafik >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>> >>: >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>> >> wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on >>>> this year?s >>>> > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG >>>> that we >>>> > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would >>>> work. I hope >>>> > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG >>>> > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re >>>> not using >>>> > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? >>>> > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there >>>> but the >>>> > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal >>>> from the >>>> > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with >>>> this year?s election, our agreement to a formal >>>> > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after >>>> we hold a >>>> > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really >>>> do need to >>>> > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with >>>> our NCPH >>>> > >>>>>>>> counterparts. >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes >>>> and keep >>>> > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will >>>> take the >>>> > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some >>>> work on how >>>> > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more >>>> systematic manner. >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> Rafik >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>> Amr >>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the >>>> answer >>>> > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can >>>> accept the >>>> > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. the >>>> > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to >>>> discuss >>>> > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their >>>> commitments, >>>> > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the >>>> what is >>>> > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we >>>> should agree >>>> > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss >>>> that later. >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Best, >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>: >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans >>>> to kick >>>> > >>>>>>>> back more. >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Bill >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>> >> wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of >>>> our best >>>> > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us >>>> newbies running >>>> > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling >>>> myself a newbie...) >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> SP >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> >> wrote: >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable >>>> to more >>>> > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>> > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> --- >>>> > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast >>>> antivirus software. >>>> > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> > >>>>>>> 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 >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> --- >>>> > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >>>> software. >>>> > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> > >>>> 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 >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> > >> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> 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 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> ********************************************************* >> William J. Drake >> International Fellow & Lecturer >> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ >> University of Zurich, Switzerland >> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, >> ICANN, www.ncuc.org >> william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), >> www.williamdrake.org >> Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q >> ********************************************************* >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 8 17:38:38 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 23:38:38 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Amr, Maybe the PC can review it and if agreed we can endorse it and communicate it even after the public comment deadline. Best, Rafik On Sep 8, 2015 9:22 PM, "Amr Elsadr" wrote: > Hi, > > > On Sep 7, 2015, at 2:58 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > [SNIP] > > > there is the deadline for data and metrics for policy-making but we > didn't get any draft yet. @Amr is this still with you?can you share the > draft? > > I?m terribly sorry about being so behind on my tasks. My schedule has been > terribly chaotic this past month, and will probably continue like this for > some time. > > I had been working on a comment for this report, but only finished it a > couple of hours before the deadline, so I went ahead and submitted it in my > individual capacity. Apologies to all once again. > > My comment is posted here: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-data-metrics-29jul15/msg00007.html > > Thanks. > > Amr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kathy Tue Sep 8 18:01:43 2015 From: kathy (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 11:01:43 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55EEF857.6030507@kathykleiman.com> Good idea! Kathy On 9/8/2015 10:38 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi Amr, > > Maybe the PC can review it and if agreed we can endorse it and > communicate it even after the public comment deadline. > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Sep 8, 2015 9:22 PM, "Amr Elsadr" > wrote: > > Hi, > > > On Sep 7, 2015, at 2:58 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > [SNIP] > > > there is the deadline for data and metrics for policy-making but > we didn't get any draft yet. @Amr is this still with you?can you > share the draft? > > I?m terribly sorry about being so behind on my tasks. My schedule > has been terribly chaotic this past month, and will probably > continue like this for some time. > > I had been working on a comment for this report, but only finished > it a couple of hours before the deadline, so I went ahead and > submitted it in my individual capacity. Apologies to all once again. > > My comment is posted here: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-data-metrics-29jul15/msg00007.html > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Lanfran Tue Sep 8 18:15:58 2015 From: Lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 11:15:58 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments on data metrics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1441725358.55eefbae350ba@oldmymail.yorku.ca> PC, I support Rafik's suggestion of going on record as endorsing Amr's comments even though the submission date has passed. Amr is not alone facing work crunches at the moment (written from California while my crops are ripening on my farm in Canada...argh!)and catch up is better than neglect. Amr?s comments on the data and metrics for policy-making submission highlight three points that should be central to how evidence is handled in any decision making process. As I read them, they call for more clarification with regard to process. First, for any data metrics input into the policy development process there should be a process for assessing the potential contribution of quantitative data to the issue at hand. Data metrics input should not simply be a (costly/time consuming) mandatory component of all PDPs. Second (and dear to my position that evidence only has relevance in context) it should neither play a defining role in the PDP nor should it diminish the role of qualitative evidence, evidence that is frequently essential in validating contextual relevance for quantitative evidence. Lastly, Amr stresses that any quantitative analysis of data should be subject to processes that insure transparent methods of assessment prior to putting it to use for the purpose of evidence-based policy development. For me this points back to the validation process. As we have seen, ICANN is not immune from calling in "expertise" and trying to run with the un-assessed evidence (e.g. Westlake). Sam L, NPOC Policy Committee From mariliamaciel Tue Sep 8 19:17:38 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 13:17:38 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments on data metrics In-Reply-To: <1441725358.55eefbae350ba@oldmymail.yorku.ca> References: <1441725358.55eefbae350ba@oldmymail.yorku.ca> Message-ID: I agree with Rafik's suggestion and with Sam's remarks. Thanks Mar?lia On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > PC, > > I support Rafik's suggestion of going on record as endorsing Amr's > comments even though the submission date has passed. Amr is not alone > facing work crunches at the moment (written from California while my > crops are ripening on my farm in Canada...argh!)and catch up is > better than neglect. > > Amr?s comments on the data and metrics for policy-making submission > highlight three points that should be central to how evidence is > handled in any decision making process. As I read them, they call for > more clarification with regard to process. > > First, for any data metrics input into the policy development process > there should be a process for assessing the potential contribution of > quantitative data to the issue at hand. Data metrics input should not > simply be a (costly/time consuming) mandatory component of all PDPs. > > Second (and dear to my position that evidence only has relevance in > context) it should neither play a defining role in the PDP nor should > it diminish the role of qualitative evidence, evidence that is > frequently essential in validating contextual relevance for > quantitative evidence. > > Lastly, Amr stresses that any quantitative analysis of data should be > subject to processes that insure transparent methods of assessment > prior to putting it to use for the purpose of evidence-based policy > development. For me this points back to the validation process. As we > have seen, ICANN is not immune from calling in "expertise" and trying > to run with the un-assessed evidence (e.g. Westlake). > > Sam L, > NPOC Policy Committee > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mariliamaciel Tue Sep 8 19:41:47 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 13:41:47 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <29F74BFF-A6B4-4791-ADC9-8FCFFD52F97A@gmail.com> <0AE89BF2-F4B3-4C32-90B5-BD391BF680B1@toast.net> <4839F999-4FA5-4454-9260-A03BBFEDC6D6@gmail.com> <55CA152F.1000307@mail.utoronto.ca> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> <35879CB3-35AB-4ECB-8BD2-901E0DA72D57@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hey, ho. Let's move forward for this year knowing there are things to revisit here. M On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > Agree with Bill and Rafik, and very much share Bill?s sentiments regarding > the use of the NCPH list. > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:20 AM, William Drake wrote: > > > > Hi > > > >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. > >> can I respond to CSG that: > >> we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they > don't support vote against in first round. > >> we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with the > alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach > >> Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard > practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. > > > > Makes sense to me > >> > >> we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if > how we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu > quo? > > > > Yes, and I also think it?d be nice if the NCPH started to communicate > again on list, conversations have all moved into a private Cc, which > doesn?t sit well. > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat : > >> Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that > >> verifies Avri's point or not ... > >> Cheers > >> Joy > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Avri > Doria > >> Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. > >> To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org > >> Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - > just > >> what we all have time for > >> > >> We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is > >> probably what we will do in the end anyway. > >> > >> avri > >> > >> > >> On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: > >> > Hi everyone, > >> > > >> > can we make some progress here? > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > > >> > Rafik > >> > > >> > 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr >> > >: > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on > >> > how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the > >> > urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a > >> > vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to > >> > select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. > >> > > >> > Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding > >> > the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on > >> > whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask > >> > to modify it. > >> > > >> > I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I > >> > have left any out, please raise them again: > >> > > >> > 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. > >> > > >> > 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along > >> > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. > >> > > >> > 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for > >> > procedure. > >> > > >> > The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying > >> > to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we > >> > could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond > >> > to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with > >> > ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he > >> > communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason > >> > for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them > >> > agreeable to the concept. > >> > > >> > So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward > >> > with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or > >> > another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. > >> > > >> > Thanks. > >> > > >> > Amr > >> > > >> > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Hi Ed, > >> > > > >> > > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) > >> > > > >> > > Rafik > >> > > > >> > > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" >> > > wrote: > >> > > Hi Rafik, > >> > > > >> > > Thanks for clarifying. > >> > > > >> > > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on > >> > surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's > >> > accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of > >> > the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) > >> > > > >> > > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact > >> > the NCPH > >> > > > >> > > Sent from my iPhone > >> > > > >> > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi Ed, > >> > > > > >> > > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. > >> > > > > >> > > > Rafik > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris >> > > a ?crit : > >> > > >> > >> > > >> No objection here. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so > >> > we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with > this. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Ed > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > > >> > >> > > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr < > aelsadr at egyptig.org > >> > > wrote: > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> Hi, > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, > >> > we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a > >> > candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much > >> > what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so > >> > clearly BTW. :) > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little > >> > dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of > >> > the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it > >> > won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, > >> > we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no > >> > need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we > >> > use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to > >> > Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks. > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> Amr > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria >> > > wrote: > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> Hi, > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical > >> > difference between > >> > > >>>> the two methods is not apparent > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated > >> > > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind > >> > > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither > >> > gets the > >> > > >>>> supermajority needed. > >> > > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs > >> > B2 and > >> > > >>>> someone might get the supermajority > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> And if you need to go the third round > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins > >> > > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might > >> > actually get > >> > > >>>> supermajority. > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly > >> > ended up > >> > > >>>> deadlocked. > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> good luck > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> avri > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: > >> > > >>>>> Hi, > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the > >> > unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most > >> > desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of > >> > just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t > >> > really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase > >> > and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council > >> > chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever > >> > method we agree ultimately end up using. > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> Thanks. > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> Amr > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris > >> > > wrote: > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am > >> > largely attempting to understand the issues and processes > >> > involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues > >> > like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where > >> > Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to > >> > eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although > >> > I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting > >> > Avri's position to the extent it matters. > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit > >> > currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute > >> > resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is > >> > chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen > >> > by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> Ed > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone > >> > > >>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria >> > > wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> avri > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about > >> > the response to > >> > > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this > >> > year only, > >> > > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working > >> > to let them > >> > > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in > >> > NCPH list . > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will > conduct > >> > > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Best, > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak > >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >>: > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" > >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on > >> > this year?s > >> > > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG > >> > that we > >> > > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would > >> > work. I hope > >> > > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG > >> > > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re > >> > not using > >> > > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? > >> > > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there > >> > but the > >> > > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal > >> > from the > >> > > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with > >> > this year?s election, our agreement to a formal > >> > > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after > >> > we hold a > >> > > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really > >> > do need to > >> > > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with > >> > our NCPH > >> > > >>>>>>>> counterparts. > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes > >> > and keep > >> > > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will > >> > take the > >> > > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some > >> > work on how > >> > > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more > >> > systematic manner. > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Amr > >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> > >> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the > >> > answer > >> > > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can > >> > accept the > >> > > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. > the > >> > > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to > >> > discuss > >> > > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their > >> > commitments, > >> > > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the > >> > what is > >> > > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we > >> > should agree > >> > > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss > >> > that later. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake > >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> >>>: > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans > >> > to kick > >> > > >>>>>>>> back more. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Bill > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin > >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of > >> > our best > >> > > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us > >> > newbies running > >> > > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling > >> > myself a newbie...) > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> SP > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable > >> > to more > >> > > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. > >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > >> > > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> --- > >> > > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast > >> > antivirus software. > >> > > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> > > >>>>>>> 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 > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> --- > >> > > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > >> > software. > >> > > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> > > >>>> 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 > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> > > >> 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 > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > PC-NCSG mailing list > >> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > >> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > >> > >> > >> --- > >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> 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 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > ********************************************************* > > William J. Drake > > International Fellow & Lecturer > > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > > University of Zurich, Switzerland > > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > > william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), > > www.williamdrake.org > > Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q > > ********************************************************* > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > 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 > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Wed Sep 9 09:59:08 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 15:59:08 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55894603.7010708@acm.org> <29F74BFF-A6B4-4791-ADC9-8FCFFD52F97A@gmail.com> <0AE89BF2-F4B3-4C32-90B5-BD391BF680B1@toast.net> <4839F999-4FA5-4454-9260-A03BBFEDC6D6@gmail.com> <55CA152F.1000307@mail.utoronto.ca> <55CDDC3F.8010209@acm.org> <55CDF721.3020809@acm.org> <96206221-049D-4A32-AC8A-723FF72BEAD9@gmail.com> <18391476-539A-4592-BB17-9E98D1C359D6@toast.net> <55DF0548.9020602@acm.org> <038201d0e304$5477dc20$fd679460$@liddicoatlaw.co.nz> Message-ID: Hi everyone, I think we got some consensus here, I will respond to Steve about this and we will have to revisit the election again (a never ending matter)... thanks everyone. lets start the discussion about the GNSO council chair and investigating the possible options. Steve already informed that CSG will contact us soon about this. Best, RAfik 2015-09-08 16:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak : > Hi, > > with GNSO council chair election coming, we have to finalize this. > can I respond to CSG that: > *we would agree with their proposal while we would like to know why they > don't support vote against in first round.* > *we will discuss the procedure of election starting next year with > the alternating between NCSG and CSG as approach* > > *Adding as conditions: Interviewing candidates should become a standard > practice.If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair > along with a potential chair, they should be considered together.* > we should start a new thread about GNSO council chair process and if how > we shall proceed: getting someone from NCPH or we will keep the statu quo? > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2015-08-30 18:14 GMT+09:00 Joy Liddicoat : > >> Hi - Rafik I am happy with your initial suggestion - not sure if that >> verifies Avri's point or not ... >> Cheers >> Joy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: PC-NCSG [mailto:pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Avri >> Doria >> Sent: Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41 a.m. >> To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org >> Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just >> what we all have time for >> >> We might as well do whatever CSG wants and get it over with. That is >> probably what we will do in the end anyway. >> >> avri >> >> >> On 27-Aug-15 03:49, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > can we make some progress here? >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > Rafik >> > >> > 2015-08-19 21:02 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr > > >: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > It appears to me like we have given Rafik no clear instructions on >> > how to proceed on this issue. The longer we delay, the greater the >> > urgency we will create in approaching a deadline where we need a >> > vice-chair from the NCPH. We?re still stuck on the process to >> > select one, instead of actually doing the selecting. >> > >> > Several points have been raised on this growing thread regarding >> > the process, and it looks like we have a bit of divergence on >> > whether to proceed with the CSG suggestion for a process, or ask >> > to modify it. >> > >> > I?ve been trying to dig up some of the points raised, but if I >> > have left any out, please raise them again: >> > >> > 1. Interviewing candidates should become a standard practice. >> > >> > 2. If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along >> > with a potential chair, they should be considered together. >> > >> > 3. Begin the voting cycle with a vote against vs. a vote for >> > procedure. >> > >> > The third point is obviously the contentious issue we are trying >> > to resolve. We haven?t heard from everybody on this issue, so we >> > could wait until we do. An alternative solution may be to respond >> > to Steve?s email by explaining the logic behind starting with >> > ?vote against?. If I have understood his email correctly, he >> > communicated that fact that the CSG didn?t understand the reason >> > for voting in this matter. An explanation from us may find them >> > agreeable to the concept. >> > >> > So which one of the two options would the PC like to move forward >> > with? Is there a third option that I have overlooked? One way or >> > another, we really do need to resolve this ASAP. >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Amr >> > >> > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Rafik Dammak >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Ed, >> > > >> > > It is steve metaltiz not steve del bianco :) >> > > >> > > Rafik >> > > >> > > On Aug 15, 2015 1:10 AM, "Edward Morris" > > > wrote: >> > > Hi Rafik, >> > > >> > > Thanks for clarifying. >> > > >> > > Doesn't surprise me. The man probably did his own stress test on >> > surgical outcomes and how his operation would impact ICANN's >> > accountability going forward and impact on the NTIA approval of >> > the transition proposal. Stress test number 36B. :) >> > > >> > > I'm sure you are on top of this, and thanks, but does the fact >> > the NCPH >> > > >> > > Sent from my iPhone >> > > >> > > > On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Rafik > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Hi Ed, >> > > > >> > > > He sent email 2 days ago asking about NCSG position. >> > > > >> > > > Rafik >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> Le 15 Aug 2015 ? 00:53, Edward Morris > > > a ?crit : >> > > >> >> > > >> No objection here. >> > > >> >> > > >> I believe Steve is recovering from surgery at the moment so >> > we might want to give him a few days before engaging him with this. >> > > >> >> > > >> Ed >> > > >> >> > > >> Sent from my iPhone >> > > >> >> > > >>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Amr Elsadr > > > wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Hi, >> > > >>> >> > > >>> I think we are actually saying the same thing. Ultimately, >> > we?ll have to work out a method where both SGs agree on a >> > candidate (the consensus I was referring to). This is pretty much >> > what you referred to as A2 and B2. Thanks for spelling that out so >> > clearly BTW. :) >> > > >>> >> > > >>> The point I was trying to make is that with a little >> > dialogue between the two SGs on who is agreeable to both halves of >> > the NCPH prior to any official elections taking place, then it >> > won?t matter what method we use (A1, B1, A2 or B2). Effectively, >> > we?ll have gone through the A2/B2 cycle first anyway. So I see no >> > need to delay this year?s election to work out which method we >> > use. If others would prefer we communicate the merits of A2/B2 to >> > Steve, I won?t object. Lets just get on with it. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> I hope that clarifies where I?m coming from. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Thanks. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Amr >> > > >>> >> > > >>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Avri Doria > > > wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> Hi, >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> I find it difficult to understand that the logical >> > difference between >> > > >>>> the two methods is not apparent >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> A1 - is CSG favorite but NCSG most hated >> > > >>>> B 1- is NCSG favorite but CSG most hated >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> A2 - is NCSG and CSG doesn't mind >> > > >>>> B2 - is CSG and NCSG doesn't mind >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> In one regualr case the 2nd round is A1 vs B1 and neither >> > gets the >> > > >>>> supermajority needed. >> > > >>>> In the voice out the least favorite case 2nd round is A2 vs >> > B2 and >> > > >>>> someone might get the supermajority >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> And if you need to go the third round >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> In one case A1 or B1 against no one - no one wins >> > > >>>> in the other case A2 or B2, against no one - some might >> > actually get >> > > >>>> supermajority. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> We have used the regular method several times and mostly >> > ended up >> > > >>>> deadlocked. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> good luck >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> avri >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>> On 14-Aug-15 15:54, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> > > >>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> To be honest, it seems to me that eliminating the >> > unacceptable first, or just moving directly to electing the most >> > desirable is of little consequence, which is why I am in favour of >> > just moving this along. Making these decisions in the NCPH doesn?t >> > really work without creating a consensus. So cutting to the chase >> > and communicating directly with the CSG on candidacy (council >> > chair/VC) issues will probably always work out best, whichever >> > method we agree ultimately end up using. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Thanks. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Amr >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Edward Morris >> > > wrote: >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> This is my first time experiencing this process so am >> > largely attempting to understand the issues and processes >> > involved. That said, I've come to he realization that on issues >> > like this involving Council procedures I ultimately wind up where >> > Avri generally starts from. I actually like the proposal to >> > eliminate the unacceptable and then moving on from there. Although >> > I'm not fully engaged in this debate please count me as supporting >> > Avri's position to the extent it matters. >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> As to the Ombudsman proposal below: no. His remit >> > currently is limited to fairness, not community dispute >> > resolution. It may make sense to add to his remit once he is >> > chosen and responds to the community but as long as he is chosen >> > by the Bosrd I'd prefer to leave him out of NCPH affairs. >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> Ed >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Avri Doria > > > wrote: >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> i think i am the only dissenting voice. >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> avri >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> On 14-Aug-15 02:48, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> can I understand we got a rough consensus here about >> > the response to >> > > >>>>>>>> send to CSG: agreeing about their proposal for this >> > year only, >> > > >>>>>>>> discussing about alternation for next years and working >> > to let them >> > > >>>>>>>> commit to that. also I will ask them to discuss more in >> > NCPH list . >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> for next long term process for VC election, we will >> conduct >> > > >>>>>>>> consultation within NCSG membership, managed by PC. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Best, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 18:17 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak >> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>: >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015 6:05 PM, "Amr Elsadr" >> > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. Lets get the ball rolling on >> > this year?s >> > > >>>>>>>> election of a VC, but make clear to Steve and the CSG >> > that we >> > > >>>>>>>> still need to talk more about how the rotations would >> > work. I hope >> > > >>>>>>>> we can start on that sooner rather than later. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> That is the goal, getting a clear answer to CSG >> > > >>>>>>>>> May I also ask a question? Is there a reason why we?re >> > not using >> > > >>>>>>>> the NCPH leadership list to hold this conversation? >> > > >>>>>>>> I asked several time that we conduct discussions there >> > but the >> > > >>>>>>>> list sounds dead for now (while they get the proposal >> > from the >> > > >>>>>>>> message Avri sent to that list) >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> And one last point?, after we agree to proceed with >> > this year?s election, our agreement to a formal >> > > >>>>>>>> process should be provisional, and only finalised after >> > we hold a >> > > >>>>>>>> discussion about it on NCSG-DISCUSS. Our members really >> > do need to >> > > >>>>>>>> be made aware that we are working these issues out with >> > our NCPH >> > > >>>>>>>> counterparts. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Yes that is the goal to document better the processes >> > and keep >> > > >>>>>>>> records. For NCSG list, yes sure but I hope the PC will >> > take the >> > > >>>>>>>> lead to do so and conduct the consultation. Maybe some >> > work on how >> > > >>>>>>>> to conduct consultation about positions on more >> > systematic manner. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Rafik >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Amr >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Rafik Dammak >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> >> > wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> lets focus here on the priority task: agreeing in the >> > answer >> > > >>>>>>>> to CWG about the proposal. can I understand we can >> > accept the >> > > >>>>>>>> amendment and acknowledge the concerns raised by Avri. >> the >> > > >>>>>>>> proposal is for this year, after that we will have to >> > discuss >> > > >>>>>>>> about rotation proposal and how we need to keep their >> > commitments, >> > > >>>>>>>> maybe by including the ombudsman in the process. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> for the chair election, it will be good to break the >> > what is >> > > >>>>>>>> becoming a tradition to have a chair from CPH, but we >> > should agree >> > > >>>>>>>> first on what we see as a good chair. we can discuss >> > that later. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> I should answer Steve soon about our position. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Rafik >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-12 0:51 GMT+09:00 William Drake >> > >> > > >>>>>>>> >>: >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> So Tony?s a no, but appreciates the interest. Plans >> > to kick >> > > >>>>>>>> back more. >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Bill >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Voila yes, except of course that would tie up one of >> > our best >> > > >>>>>>>> guys right when we are losing Avri....leaving us >> > newbies running >> > > >>>>>>>> the ranch (yeah yeah I know, I cannot keep calling >> > myself a newbie...) >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> SP >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Perennially new (or is that Perrinially new??) >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-08-11 4:41, William Drake wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 10:32 AM, Edward Morris >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > >> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, Amr is someone who would be acceptable >> > to more >> > > >>>>>>>> than a few CSG and CPH members. >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If so then voila, no? >> > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 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 >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > > >>>>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> --- >> > > >>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast >> > antivirus software. >> > > >>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>>>>> 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 >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> --- >> > > >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >> > software. >> > > >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >>>> 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 >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> _______________________________________________ >> > > >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > >> 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PC-NCSG mailing list >> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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: From rafik.dammak Wed Sep 9 10:05:54 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 16:05:54 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, seeing several positive responses regarding this approach, we can wait 1 or 2 days and then I will send the letter the ICANN staff supporting the working group (any idea who is?) any suggestion for the letter to send? Best, Rafik 2015-09-08 23:38 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak : > Hi Amr, > > Maybe the PC can review it and if agreed we can endorse it and communicate > it even after the public comment deadline. > > Best, > > Rafik > On Sep 8, 2015 9:22 PM, "Amr Elsadr" wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > On Sep 7, 2015, at 2:58 AM, Rafik Dammak >> wrote: >> > >> >> [SNIP] >> >> > there is the deadline for data and metrics for policy-making but we >> didn't get any draft yet. @Amr is this still with you?can you share the >> draft? >> >> I?m terribly sorry about being so behind on my tasks. My schedule has >> been terribly chaotic this past month, and will probably continue like this >> for some time. >> >> I had been working on a comment for this report, but only finished it a >> couple of hours before the deadline, so I went ahead and submitted it in my >> individual capacity. Apologies to all once again. >> >> My comment is posted here: >> http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-data-metrics-29jul15/msg00007.html >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Wed Sep 9 17:03:23 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 23:03:23 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Update for planning public comments Message-ID: Hi everyone, we will have to work and review in several comment with coming soon deadlines/ 1. Accountability: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit Milton made the last call in the list and we resolved the HR language. please review and endorse it soon. Amr should share soon drafts about, @Amr can you confirm for this, their deadline is by the end of this week 1. Removal of Searchable Whois Service from .SHARP Registry Agreement 2. Proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments?GNSO Policy & Implementation Recommendations Amr submitted the comment about metrics and date for policy and we see already some support. hopefully we can endorse it http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-data-metrics-29jul15/msg00007.html . lets make it by Friday. We should also start working on coming weeks on : Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en and New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-auction-proceeds-2015-09-08-en I created the 2 google doc for those draft, I may try to work on outline to kick off the discussion in the list too but it will be helpful to get 1 or 2 persons to join me here. any volunteer? for new gTLD https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dEgQxOP0NYc6JtVx_GWDqwn9bihI8U09KTBbhbOBz3Q/edit for auctions: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10Im-BTA6D32M_Rtn-IxrvjVAi5IjAZM5V-WQJC_wlIc/edit Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Thu Sep 10 02:33:11 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 19:33:11 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] NCSG Accountability Statement was Re: [] Update for planning public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55F0C1B7.8020509@acm.org> On 09-Sep-15 10:03, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > 1. Accountability: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit > > Milton made the last call in the list and we resolved the HR language. > please review and endorse it soon. While I am not in agreement with some of the contents of comment, I do believe that issues were discussed sufficiently and that it represents the rough consensus of the NCSG according to its rules and practices. I support it being posted as the NCSG response. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From rafik.dammak Thu Sep 10 10:47:01 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 16:47:01 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Use of Country and Territory Names as top-level domains - please provide feedback In-Reply-To: <5d970960751540b1aa0a6ab9aa1a9ee9@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> References: <5d970960751540b1aa0a6ab9aa1a9ee9@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> Message-ID: Hi everyone, shall we prioritise this and send input? Rafik ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Glen de Saint G?ry Date: 2015-09-09 22:08 GMT+09:00 Subject: Use of Country and Territory Names as top-level domains - please provide feedback To: Rafik Dammak Cc: Maryam Bakoshi , Lars Hoffmann < lars.hoffmann at icann.org> Dear SG/C Chair, As you may be aware, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils have chartered a Cross Community Working Group on the Use of Country and Territory Names as top-level domains (CWG-UCTN). The objective of the CWG-UCTN is to review the current status of representations of country and territory names, as they exist under current ICANN policies, guidelines and procedures. In addition, the Group has been asked to provide advice regarding the feasibility of developing a consistent and uniform set of definitions that could be applicable across the respective SO's and AC's for country and territory names as top-level domains. Please note that the scope of the WG is strictly limited to: ? Representations of names of Countries, Territories and their subdivisions listed on or eligible to be listed on the Alpha-2 code International Standard for country codes and codes for their subdivisions (ISO 3166-1), (Names of Country and Territory). Other geographical indicators, such as regions, are excluded; ? The use of Country and Territory names as Top Level Domains. The use of Country and Territory names as second or other level is excluded. The CWG-UTCN has divided its work into three work stream: 2-letter codes, 3-letter codes, and full names of countries and territories; currently the Group is starting its discussion on 3-letter codes and it is on this issue specifically that your feedback is being sought at this time. Please note that the community will be given ample opportunity to comment and provide feedback on all other issues in due course. To help the CWG-UCTN in its discussion on three-character codes, you will find below a number of questions; it would be very helpful to the Group if you could provide feedback on some or all questions raised. Please do not hesitate to supply any additional comments you may have on three-letter codes, as long as they are within the scope of work of the CWG (see above). Please send your comments to Lars Hoffmann (lars.hoffmann at icann.org), who is part of the CWG?s staff support team, by Friday 9 October 2015. If you cannot submit your input by that date, but you would like to contribute, please let us know when we can expect to receive your contribution so we can plan accordingly. Your input will be very much appreciated. With best regards, Heather Forrest, GNSO (Co-Chair) Carlos Guti?rrez, GNSO (Co-Chair) Annebeth Lange, ccNSO (Co-Chair) Paul Szyndler, ccNSO (Co-Chair) Questions by the CWG-UCTN on 3-character codes with regard to the use of country and territory names as top-level domains 1. In future, should all three-character top-level domains be reserved as ccTLDs only and be ineligible for use as gTLDs? What would be the advantage or disadvantage of such a policy? 2. In future, should all three-character top-level domains be eligible for use as gTLDs as long as they are not in conflict with the existing alpha-3 codes from the ISO 3166-1 list; i.e. the three-character version of the same ISO list that is the basis for current ccTLD allocation? What would be the advantage or disadvantage of such a policy? 3. In future, should three-character strings be eligible for use as gTLDs if they are not in conflict with existing alpha-3 codes form the ISO 3166-1 list and they have received documentation of support or non-objection from the relevant government or public authority? What would be the advantage or disadvantage of such a policy? 4. In future, should there be unrestricted use of three-character strings as gTLDs if they are not conflicting with any applicable string similarity rules? What would be the advantage or disadvantage of such a policy? 5. In future, should all IDN three-character strings be reserved exclusively as ccTLDs and be ineligible as IDN gTLDs? What would be the advantage or disadvantage of such a policy? 6. In future, should there be unrestricted use of IDN three-character strings if they are not in conflict with existing TLDs or any applicable string similarity rules? What would be the advantage or disadvantage of such a policy? 7. Do you have any additional comments that may help the CWG-UCTN in its discussion on three-character strings as top-level domains? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 11 04:05:01 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:05:01 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] GNSO council chair election Message-ID: Hi everyone, as expected CSG approaching us for the GNSO council chair election and they are suggesting to nominate Heather and that we have call with her . quoting his response below:" The CSG Executive Committee believes Heather Forrest would make an excellent GNSO Council chair. She offers a unique combination of ICANN experience, enthusiasm, work ethic, deep knowledge and a collegial and open-minded working style that make her an ideal candidate. We propose that our House put Heather forward as its nominee. As you know, nominations are due September 25. I encourage you to work with Heather (also copied here) to arrange a teleconference interview with participants from your side of the House in time to reach a decision on our nominee prior to this deadline. (CSG held a similar interview call with Heather yesterday.) Please let me know if there is anything I can do to facilitate this. Regarding the vice chair selection process, we are in full agreement with your first condition stated below, that an interview be built into the process. However, we are not sure what you mean by the second condition, ?If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered together.? Since the NCPH role in the two cases is quite different (we nominate a chair candidate that is voted on by all GNSO councilors, while the vice chair is not just nominated but selected by NCPH alone), we are not clear whether you are suggesting that both processes be carried out in tandem, and if so why. Any clarification you can provide would be welcomed. " Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Fri Sep 11 07:34:42 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:34:42 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] GNSO council chair election In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55F259E2.8060203@acm.org> Hi, Seems like a decent recommendation. I recommend a call with Heather. avri On 10-Sep-15 21:05, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi everyone, > > as expected CSG approaching us for the GNSO council chair election and > they are suggesting to nominate Heather and that we have call with her . > > quoting his response below:" > > The CSG Executive Committee believes Heather Forrest would make an > excellent GNSO Council chair. She offers a unique combination of > ICANN experience, enthusiasm, work ethic, deep knowledge and a > collegial and open-minded working style that make her an ideal > candidate. We propose that our House put Heather forward as its > nominee. > > > > As you know, nominations are due September 25. I encourage you to > work with Heather (also copied here) to arrange a teleconference > interview with participants from your side of the House in time to > reach a decision on our nominee prior to this deadline. (CSG held a > similar interview call with Heather yesterday.) Please let me know if > there is anything I can do to facilitate this. > > > > Regarding the vice chair selection process, we are in full agreement > with your first condition stated below, that an interview be built > into the process. However, we are not sure what you mean by the > second condition, ?If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council > vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered > together.? Since the NCPH role in the two cases is quite different > (we nominate a chair candidate that is voted on by all GNSO > councilors, while the vice chair is not just nominated but selected by > NCPH alone), we are not clear whether you are suggesting that both > processes be carried out in tandem, and if so why. Any clarification > you can provide would be welcomed. > > " > > Rafik > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 11 08:13:04 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 14:13:04 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] GNSO council chair election In-Reply-To: <55F259E2.8060203@acm.org> References: <55F259E2.8060203@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi Avri, Thanks, we can plan call with Heather next week to give her a chance. I will check about the availability later. I guess we should also weight all options if any. Best, Rafik On Sep 11, 2015 1:34 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > Hi, > > Seems like a decent recommendation. I recommend a call with Heather. > > avri > > On 10-Sep-15 21:05, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > as expected CSG approaching us for the GNSO council chair election and > > they are suggesting to nominate Heather and that we have call with her . > > > > quoting his response below:" > > > > The CSG Executive Committee believes Heather Forrest would make an > > excellent GNSO Council chair. She offers a unique combination of > > ICANN experience, enthusiasm, work ethic, deep knowledge and a > > collegial and open-minded working style that make her an ideal > > candidate. We propose that our House put Heather forward as its > > nominee. > > > > > > > > As you know, nominations are due September 25. I encourage you to > > work with Heather (also copied here) to arrange a teleconference > > interview with participants from your side of the House in time to > > reach a decision on our nominee prior to this deadline. (CSG held a > > similar interview call with Heather yesterday.) Please let me know if > > there is anything I can do to facilitate this. > > > > > > > > Regarding the vice chair selection process, we are in full agreement > > with your first condition stated below, that an interview be built > > into the process. However, we are not sure what you mean by the > > second condition, ?If the NCPH will be suggesting both a council > > vice-chair along with a potential chair, they should be considered > > together.? Since the NCPH role in the two cases is quite different > > (we nominate a chair candidate that is voted on by all GNSO > > councilors, while the vice chair is not just nominated but selected by > > NCPH alone), we are not clear whether you are suggesting that both > > processes be carried out in tandem, and if so why. Any clarification > > you can provide would be welcomed. > > > > " > > > > Rafik > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Fri Sep 11 15:12:19 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:12:19 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] GNSO council chair election In-Reply-To: References: <55F259E2.8060203@acm.org> Message-ID: <55F2C523.7080206@acm.org> On 11-Sep-15 01:13, Rafik Dammak wrote: > I guess we should also weight all options if any. What other options do we have? avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 11 15:16:33 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 21:16:33 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] NCSG Accountability Statement was Re: [] Update for planning public comments In-Reply-To: <55F0C1B7.8020509@acm.org> References: <55F0C1B7.8020509@acm.org> Message-ID: hi everyone, the deadline for submission is tomorrow. there was no objection, the comment got support within NCSG list and it was under review for a while. I think we can consider it as endorsed. Thanks! Best, Rafik 2015-09-10 8:33 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria : > > > On 09-Sep-15 10:03, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > 1. Accountability: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit > > > > Milton made the last call in the list and we resolved the HR language. > > please review and endorse it soon. > > While I am not in agreement with some of the contents of comment, I do > believe that issues were discussed sufficiently and that it represents > the rough consensus of the NCSG according to its rules and practices. > > I support it being posted as the NCSG response. > > avri > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin Fri Sep 11 16:57:39 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:57:39 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] NCSG Accountability Statement was Re: [] Update for planning public comments In-Reply-To: References: <55F0C1B7.8020509@acm.org> Message-ID: <55F2DDD3.5040703@mail.utoronto.ca> Works for me. Thanks for doing all the heavy lifting folks!! Stephanie On 2015-09-11 8:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > hi everyone, > > the deadline for submission is tomorrow. there was no objection, the > comment got support within NCSG list and it was under review for a while. > I think we can consider it as endorsed. > Thanks! > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2015-09-10 8:33 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria >: > > > > On 09-Sep-15 10:03, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > 1. Accountability: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit > > > > Milton made the last call in the list and we resolved the HR > language. > > please review and endorse it soon. > > While I am not in agreement with some of the contents of comment, I do > believe that issues were discussed sufficiently and that it represents > the rough consensus of the NCSG according to its rules and practices. > > I support it being posted as the NCSG response. > > avri > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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: From aelsadr Fri Sep 11 22:48:30 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 21:48:30 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] NCSG Accountability Statement was Re: [] Update for planning public comments In-Reply-To: <55F0C1B7.8020509@acm.org> References: <55F0C1B7.8020509@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi, I haven't been able to actively contribute to this comment, and wish there was more momentum within the NCSG against budget/strategic plan veto by the community, but agree with Avri. This comment seems duly representative of the NCSG's sentiments on the CCWG proposal, so I believe the PC should endorse it. Thanks. Amr Sent from mobile > On Sep 10, 2015, at 1:33 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > >> On 09-Sep-15 10:03, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> 1. Accountability: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JGBXO5oOiN_FxivPFkHjz3Gc2w3AT2PeJznrXPw2fJ4/edit >> >> Milton made the last call in the list and we resolved the HR language. >> please review and endorse it soon. > > While I am not in agreement with some of the contents of comment, I do > believe that issues were discussed sufficiently and that it represents > the rough consensus of the NCSG according to its rules and practices. > > I support it being posted as the NCSG response. > > avri > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From rafik.dammak Sat Sep 12 15:13:54 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 21:13:54 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [Important] Reminder about public comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Since there was no objection. I will send a note endorsing Amr comment. Best, Rafik On Sep 9, 2015 4:05 PM, "Rafik Dammak" wrote: > Hi, > > seeing several positive responses regarding this approach, we can wait 1 > or 2 days and then I will send the letter the ICANN staff supporting the > working group (any idea who is?) > > any suggestion for the letter to send? > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2015-09-08 23:38 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak : > >> Hi Amr, >> >> Maybe the PC can review it and if agreed we can endorse it and >> communicate it even after the public comment deadline. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> On Sep 8, 2015 9:22 PM, "Amr Elsadr" wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> > On Sep 7, 2015, at 2:58 AM, Rafik Dammak >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >>> [SNIP] >>> >>> > there is the deadline for data and metrics for policy-making but we >>> didn't get any draft yet. @Amr is this still with you?can you share the >>> draft? >>> >>> I?m terribly sorry about being so behind on my tasks. My schedule has >>> been terribly chaotic this past month, and will probably continue like this >>> for some time. >>> >>> I had been working on a comment for this report, but only finished it a >>> couple of hours before the deadline, so I went ahead and submitted it in my >>> individual capacity. Apologies to all once again. >>> >>> My comment is posted here: >>> http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-data-metrics-29jul15/msg00007.html >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Amr >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Mon Sep 14 23:51:29 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:51:29 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [] council: TR: CPH process for selecting ICANN Board seat #13 In-Reply-To: <16d0dfedffeb42ac9cbe2ba34c4767c3@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> References: <16d0dfedffeb42ac9cbe2ba34c4767c3@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> Message-ID: <55F73351.5010203@acm.org> forwarded for those not on the council list. avri -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [council] TR: CPH process for selecting ICANN Board seat #13 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:35:52 +0000 From: Glen de Saint G?ry To: GNSO Council List (council at gnso.icann.org) Dear All, In preparation for the Council meeting on Thursday, 24 September 2015, this process has been posted on the GNSO website at : http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/elections http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/cph-board-seat-selection-process-03sep15-en.pdf Thank you. Kind regards, Glen *De :*Glen de Saint G?ry *Envoy? :* lundi 7 septembre 2015 23:29 *? :* Marika Konings; Erika Randall *Cc :* Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com); KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com); Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com); Glen de Saint G?ry; David Olive *Objet :* TR: CPH process for selecting ICANN Board seat #13 *Importance :* Haute Dear Paul, Thank you very much for the Contracted Parties House procedure for selecting ICANN Board seat #13 and for informing us that consultations will begin @ICANN Dublin. This procedure will be posted on the GNSO website at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/elections Kind regards, Glen *De :*Paul Diaz [mailto:pdiaz at pir.org] *Envoy? :* lundi 7 septembre 2015 20:00 *? :* Glen de Saint G?ry; marika.kinings at icann.org ; Erika Randall *Cc :* Cherie Stubbs; Drazek, Keith; Michele Neylon - Blacknight *Objet :* CPH process for selecting ICANN Board seat #13 *Importance :* Haute Hello, all The RySG and RrSG pulled together the attached description of how the Contracted Parties House goes about selecting ICANN Board seat #13.In fact, we will begin consultations @ ICANN Dublin. Please feel free to contact Keith, Michele or I if you have any questions or concerns. We?re sorry it took so long for us to get back to the GNSO Secretariat. Best, P Paul Diaz Chair elect, RySG --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CPH selection process for Board seat #13.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16954 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 15 13:57:54 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:57:54 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> Message-ID: Hi everyone, please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. any thought? Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Glen de Saint G?ry Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" , Rafik Dammak , "tony holmes ( tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil Corwin < psc at vlaw-dc.com>, "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" < gregshatanipc at gmail.com> Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" , Darcy Southwell , Glen de Saint G?ry < Glen at icann.org>, "gnso-secs at icann.org" Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate.? A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than *23h59UTC on 25 September 2015*. House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible after they have been selected by their house and not later than *23:59 UTC on 02 October 2015*. *Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015* Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split in two parts: ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current Council. ? Adjourn the meeting ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: Election of the Chair The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat *gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org * *http://gnso.icann.org * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Tue Sep 15 14:27:34 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:27:34 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] GNSO council chair election In-Reply-To: <55F2C523.7080206@acm.org> References: <55F259E2.8060203@acm.org> <55F2C523.7080206@acm.org> Message-ID: <3E4E8D9B-A9A2-4C73-81B6-D14DA92BF682@egyptig.org> Hi, I don?t recall any other options for a NCPH candidate. If I recall correctly, Tony Holmes was approached as a possible candidate, but informed us that he would not be running. Have we discussed any other alternatives? In any case, as Heather was suggested as a candidate, I see no harm in holding a call with her. I am still apprehensive about backing an IPC or BC candidate for chair, even if it is Heather, but certainly not opposed to discussing this with them. Thanks. Amr > On Sep 11, 2015, at 2:12 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > On 11-Sep-15 01:13, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> I guess we should also weight all options if any. > > What other options do we have? > > avri > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From aelsadr Tue Sep 15 14:37:38 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:37:38 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> Message-ID: <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> Hi, I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we know Heather would be available? Thanks. Amr > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. > any thought? > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Glen de Saint G?ry > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" , Rafik Dammak , "tony holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" , Darcy Southwell , Glen de Saint G?ry , "gnso-secs at icann.org" > > > > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, > > > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair > > http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf > > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! > > > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): > > > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate.? > > > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September 2015. > > > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC on 02 October 2015. > > > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). > > > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. > > > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split in two parts: > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current Council. > > ? Adjourn the meeting > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: > Election of the Chair > > > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > > > Glen > > Glen de Saint G?ry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 15 14:47:34 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:47:34 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hi, Heather is available next week for this time window: Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC Rafik 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > Hi, > > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during the > NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we know > Heather would be available? > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other > option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. > > any thought? > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , > "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < > michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony > holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil > Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( > gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < > rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell , > Glen de Saint G?ry , "gnso-secs at icann.org" < > gnso-secs at icann.org> > > > > > > > > > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, > > > > > > > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair > > > > http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf > > > > > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! > > > > > > > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 > > > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): > > > > > > > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council > Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its > candidate.? > > > > > > > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the > house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating > Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting > chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the > pool of available candidates if they so wish. > > > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at the > annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit its > nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end of > the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September 2015. > > > > > > > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit > each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. > > > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the GNSO > Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible after > they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC on 02 > October 2015. > > > > > > > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 > > > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO > Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of > the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). > > > > > > > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during > the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. > > > > > > > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split > in two parts: > > > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current > Council. > > > > ? Adjourn the meeting > > > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. > > > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: > > Election of the Chair > > > > > > > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting (AGM). > The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and the > Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first meeting > will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > > Glen > > > > Glen de Saint G?ry > > GNSO Secretariat > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egmorris1 Tue Sep 15 15:06:28 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 08:06:28 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <7dd1572250ef45ee9e1725da6c496760@toast.net> Hi Rafik, I'm unavailable Monday morning (hospital appointment) but am available the other time periods. Thanks for coordinating. Ed ---------------------------------------- From: "Rafik Dammak" Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 12:48 PM To: "Amr Elsadr" Cc: "NCSG-Policy" Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 Hi, Heather is available next week for this time window: Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC Rafik 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : Hi, I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during the NCSG's monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we know Heather would be available? Thanks. Amr > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. > any thought? > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Glen de Saint G?ry > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" , Rafik Dammak , "tony holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" , Darcy Southwell , Glen de Saint G?ry , "gnso-secs at icann.org" > > > > > Dear All - Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, > > > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair > > http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf > > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! > > > > Nomination Process - September to October 2015 > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): > > > > "Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate." > > > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September 2015. > > > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit each House's nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC on 02 October 2015. > > > > Procedure in Dublin - October 2015 > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). > > > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. > > > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split in two parts: > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current Council. > > ? Adjourn the meeting > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: > Election of the Chair > > > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > > > Glen > > Glen de Saint G?ry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Tue Sep 15 15:46:09 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:46:09 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Hi, I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC timing). Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t make it between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. Thanks. Amr > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi, > > Heather is available next week for this time window: > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC > > Rafik > > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > Hi, > > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we know Heather would be available? > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. > > any thought? > > > > Best, > > > > Rafik > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" , Rafik Dammak , "tony holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" , Darcy Southwell , Glen de Saint G?ry , "gnso-secs at icann.org" > > > > > > > > > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, > > > > > > > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair > > > > http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf > > > > > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! > > > > > > > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 > > > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): > > > > > > > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate.? > > > > > > > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. > > > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September 2015. > > > > > > > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. > > > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC on 02 October 2015. > > > > > > > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 > > > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). > > > > > > > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. > > > > > > > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split in two parts: > > > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current Council. > > > > ? Adjourn the meeting > > > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. > > > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: > > Election of the Chair > > > > > > > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > > Glen > > > > Glen de Saint G?ry > > GNSO Secretariat > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > From mariliamaciel Tue Sep 15 19:25:59 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:25:59 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hello all, If we go for the first option, I would prefer we schedule it at 11:00 AM UTC. The other options would be ok for me, but I think Amr's point is very sensible. Best Mar?lia On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC timing). > Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t make it > between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Heather is available next week for this time window: > > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC > > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC > > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > > Hi, > > > > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during > the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we > know Heather would be available? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Amr > > > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. > > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other > option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. > > > any thought? > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry > > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 > > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair > 2015 > > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , > "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < > michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony > holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil > Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( > gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" > > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < > rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell , > Glen de Saint G?ry , "gnso-secs at icann.org" < > gnso-secs at icann.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, > > > > > > > > > > > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair > > > > > > > http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf > > > > > > > > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! > > > > > > > > > > > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 > > > > > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council > Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its > candidate.? > > > > > > > > > > > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the > house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating > Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting > chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the > pool of available candidates if they so wish. > > > > > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at > the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit > its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end > of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September > 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit > each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. > > > > > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the > GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible > after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC > on 02 October 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 > > > > > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO > Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of > the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). > > > > > > > > > > > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during > the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split > in two parts: > > > > > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current > Council. > > > > > > ? Adjourn the meeting > > > > > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. > > > > > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: > > > Election of the Chair > > > > > > > > > > > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting > (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and > the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first > meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Glen > > > > > > Glen de Saint G?ry > > > GNSO Secretariat > > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > > > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > 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 > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Wed Sep 16 13:37:37 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:37:37 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hi , I think we can go with time in Wednesday in 7:00 to 12:00pm UTC . I will reach Heather soon. Best, Rafik 2015-09-15 21:46 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > Hi, > > I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC timing). > Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t make it > between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Heather is available next week for this time window: > > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC > > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC > > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > > Hi, > > > > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during > the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we > know Heather would be available? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Amr > > > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. > > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other > option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. > > > any thought? > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Rafik > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry > > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 > > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair > 2015 > > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , > "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < > michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony > holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , Phil > Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( > gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" > > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < > rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell , > Glen de Saint G?ry , "gnso-secs at icann.org" < > gnso-secs at icann.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, > > > > > > > > > > > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair > > > > > > > http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf > > > > > > > > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! > > > > > > > > > > > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 > > > > > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): > > > > > > > > > > > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council > Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its > candidate.? > > > > > > > > > > > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the > house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting Nominating > Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a non-voting > chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate from the > pool of available candidates if they so wish. > > > > > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at > the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit > its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end > of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September > 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit > each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. > > > > > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the > GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible > after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC > on 02 October 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 > > > > > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO > Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of > the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). > > > > > > > > > > > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during > the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be split > in two parts: > > > > > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current > Council. > > > > > > ? Adjourn the meeting > > > > > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. > > > > > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: > > > Election of the Chair > > > > > > > > > > > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting > (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and > the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first > meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Glen > > > > > > Glen de Saint G?ry > > > GNSO Secretariat > > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > > > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > > > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mariliamaciel Wed Sep 16 13:50:15 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 07:50:15 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, 7:00AM UTC is 4:00 AM here, so it if possible to schedule a time later on this slot you mentioned (from 11:00 AM UTC onwards), it would be better). Thank you. M On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi , > > I think we can go with time in Wednesday in 7:00 to 12:00pm UTC . > I will reach Heather soon. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > 2015-09-15 21:46 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > >> Hi, >> >> I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC >> timing). Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t >> make it between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> >> > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > Heather is available next week for this time window: >> > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC >> > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC >> > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC >> > >> > Rafik >> > >> > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >> > Hi, >> > >> > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during >> the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we >> know Heather would be available? >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Amr >> > >> > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak >> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi everyone, >> > > >> > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. >> > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other >> option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. >> > > any thought? >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > >> > > Rafik >> > > >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry >> > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 >> > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair >> 2015 >> > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , >> "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < >> michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony >> holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , >> Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( >> gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" >> > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < >> rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell < >> darcy.southwell at endurance.com>, Glen de Saint G?ry , " >> gnso-secs at icann.org" >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair >> > > >> > > >> http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf >> > > >> > > >> > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 >> > > >> > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO >> Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate >> its candidate.? >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of >> the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting >> Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a >> non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate >> from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. >> > > >> > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at >> the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit >> its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end >> of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September >> 2015. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( >> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit >> each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. >> > > >> > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the >> GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible >> after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC >> on 02 October 2015. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 >> > > >> > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO >> Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of >> the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place during >> the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be >> split in two parts: >> > > >> > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current >> Council. >> > > >> > > ? Adjourn the meeting >> > > >> > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. >> > > >> > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: >> > > Election of the Chair >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting >> (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and >> the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first >> meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Please let me know if you have any questions. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Thank you. >> > > >> > > Kind regards, >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Glen >> > > >> > > Glen de Saint G?ry >> > > GNSO Secretariat >> > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org >> > > http://gnso.icann.org >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > PC-NCSG mailing list >> > > 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 > > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Wed Sep 16 13:55:33 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:55:33 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hi, the timeslot she suggested end at 11:00UTC. however, I will ask her for 11:00UTC, I think as candidate she should be able to accommodate the group she is asking for its support. Best, Rafik 2015-09-16 19:50 GMT+09:00 Marilia Maciel : > Hi Rafik, 7:00AM UTC is 4:00 AM here, so it if possible to schedule a time > later on this slot you mentioned (from 11:00 AM UTC onwards), it would be > better). Thank you. > M > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > >> Hi , >> >> I think we can go with time in Wednesday in 7:00 to 12:00pm UTC . >> I will reach Heather soon. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> >> 2015-09-15 21:46 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC >>> timing). Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t >>> make it between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Amr >>> >>> > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > Heather is available next week for this time window: >>> > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC >>> > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC >>> > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC >>> > >>> > Rafik >>> > >>> > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us during >>> the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in which we >>> know Heather would be available? >>> > >>> > Thanks. >>> > >>> > Amr >>> > >>> > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > Hi everyone, >>> > > >>> > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. >>> > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other >>> option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. >>> > > any thought? >>> > > >>> > > Best, >>> > > >>> > > Rafik >>> > > >>> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry >>> > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 >>> > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair >>> 2015 >>> > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , >>> "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < >>> michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony >>> holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , >>> Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( >>> gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" >>> > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < >>> rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell < >>> darcy.southwell at endurance.com>, Glen de Saint G?ry , " >>> gnso-secs at icann.org" >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair >>> > > >>> > > >>> http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 >>> > > >>> > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO >>> Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate >>> its candidate.? >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of >>> the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting >>> Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a >>> non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate >>> from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. >>> > > >>> > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process at >>> the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to submit >>> its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at the end >>> of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 September >>> 2015. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( >>> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit >>> each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. >>> > > >>> > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the >>> GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible >>> after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC >>> on 02 October 2015. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 >>> > > >>> > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO >>> Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of >>> the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place >>> during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be >>> split in two parts: >>> > > >>> > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current >>> Council. >>> > > >>> > > ? Adjourn the meeting >>> > > >>> > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. >>> > > >>> > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: >>> > > Election of the Chair >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting >>> (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and >>> the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first >>> meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Please let me know if you have any questions. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Thank you. >>> > > >>> > > Kind regards, >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Glen >>> > > >>> > > Glen de Saint G?ry >>> > > GNSO Secretariat >>> > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org >>> > > http://gnso.icann.org >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > PC-NCSG mailing list >>> > > 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 >> >> > > > -- > *Mar?lia Maciel* > Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio > Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law > School > http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts > > DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu > PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ > Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - > http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mariliamaciel Wed Sep 16 15:00:36 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:00:36 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Message-ID: If she cannot, i can make it at 7:00 AM (10:00 UTC). Thanks. Em 16/09/2015 07:55, "Rafik Dammak" escreveu: > Hi, > > the timeslot she suggested end at 11:00UTC. however, I will ask her for > 11:00UTC, I think as candidate she should be able to accommodate the group > she is asking for its support. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > 2015-09-16 19:50 GMT+09:00 Marilia Maciel : > >> Hi Rafik, 7:00AM UTC is 4:00 AM here, so it if possible to schedule a >> time later on this slot you mentioned (from 11:00 AM UTC onwards), it would >> be better). Thank you. >> M >> >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Rafik Dammak >> wrote: >> >>> Hi , >>> >>> I think we can go with time in Wednesday in 7:00 to 12:00pm UTC . >>> I will reach Heather soon. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> >>> 2015-09-15 21:46 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC >>>> timing). Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t >>>> make it between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Amr >>>> >>>> > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hi, >>>> > >>>> > Heather is available next week for this time window: >>>> > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC >>>> > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC >>>> > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC >>>> > >>>> > Rafik >>>> > >>>> > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >>>> > Hi, >>>> > >>>> > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us >>>> during the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in >>>> which we know Heather would be available? >>>> > >>>> > Thanks. >>>> > >>>> > Amr >>>> > >>>> > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak >>>> wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > Hi everyone, >>>> > > >>>> > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. >>>> > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other >>>> option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. >>>> > > any thought? >>>> > > >>>> > > Best, >>>> > > >>>> > > Rafik >>>> > > >>>> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry >>>> > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 >>>> > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council >>>> Chair 2015 >>>> > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , >>>> "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < >>>> michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony >>>> holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , >>>> Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( >>>> gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" >>>> > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < >>>> rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell < >>>> darcy.southwell at endurance.com>, Glen de Saint G?ry , " >>>> gnso-secs at icann.org" >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 >>>> > > >>>> > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO >>>> Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate >>>> its candidate.? >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of >>>> the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting >>>> Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a >>>> non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate >>>> from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. >>>> > > >>>> > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process >>>> at the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to >>>> submit its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at >>>> the end of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 >>>> September 2015. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( >>>> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit >>>> each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. >>>> > > >>>> > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the >>>> GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible >>>> after they have been selected by their house and not later than 23:59 UTC >>>> on 02 October 2015. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 >>>> > > >>>> > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO >>>> Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of >>>> the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place >>>> during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be >>>> split in two parts: >>>> > > >>>> > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current >>>> Council. >>>> > > >>>> > > ? Adjourn the meeting >>>> > > >>>> > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. >>>> > > >>>> > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: >>>> > > Election of the Chair >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting >>>> (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and >>>> the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first >>>> meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Please let me know if you have any questions. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Thank you. >>>> > > >>>> > > Kind regards, >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Glen >>>> > > >>>> > > Glen de Saint G?ry >>>> > > GNSO Secretariat >>>> > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org >>>> > > http://gnso.icann.org >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > _______________________________________________ >>>> > > PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> > > 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> *Mar?lia Maciel* >> Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio >> Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law >> School >> http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts >> >> DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu >> PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ >> Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - >> http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Thu Sep 17 04:25:18 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:25:18 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council Chair 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <08567e7e5a4a4d28869787e0c5fff380@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> <23C00EEE-167C-4298-9369-03BF04BCA259@egyptig.org> <326F9AB4-D848-49F0-86ED-3B22FD9CEAA6@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Thanks Marilia, I will send her the proposed time them Wednesday 10UTC. we should continue the discussions on what we want to ask her. Best, Rafik 2015-09-16 21:00 GMT+09:00 Marilia Maciel : > If she cannot, i can make it at 7:00 AM (10:00 UTC). Thanks. > Em 16/09/2015 07:55, "Rafik Dammak" escreveu: > >> Hi, >> >> the timeslot she suggested end at 11:00UTC. however, I will ask her for >> 11:00UTC, I think as candidate she should be able to accommodate the group >> she is asking for its support. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> >> 2015-09-16 19:50 GMT+09:00 Marilia Maciel : >> >>> Hi Rafik, 7:00AM UTC is 4:00 AM here, so it if possible to schedule a >>> time later on this slot you mentioned (from 11:00 AM UTC onwards), it would >>> be better). Thank you. >>> M >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Rafik Dammak >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi , >>>> >>>> I think we can go with time in Wednesday in 7:00 to 12:00pm UTC . >>>> I will reach Heather soon. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-09-15 21:46 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I would prefer a time that wasn?t in the middle of the night (UTC >>>>> timing). Any time between UTC 07:00 - UTC 12:00 would be fine by me. Can?t >>>>> make it between UTC 22:00 and UTC 07:00. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Amr >>>>> >>>>> > On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Rafik Dammak >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Hi, >>>>> > >>>>> > Heather is available next week for this time window: >>>>> > Monday 21st 0900-1200 UTC >>>>> > Monday 21st 2200 - Tuesday 1100 UTC >>>>> > Tuesday 22nd 2200 - Wednesday 1100 UTC >>>>> > >>>>> > Rafik >>>>> > >>>>> > 2015-09-15 20:37 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >>>>> > Hi, >>>>> > >>>>> > I would prefer a separate call with Heather over her joining us >>>>> during the NCSG?s monthly call. Perhaps start a doodle with options in >>>>> which we know Heather would be available? >>>>> > >>>>> > Thanks. >>>>> > >>>>> > Amr >>>>> > >>>>> > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Rafik Dammak >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Hi everyone, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > please find below the timeline and process for GNSO council chair. >>>>> > > I am liaising with Heather to schedule a confcall this week. other >>>>> option would be for her to join our monthly call next week Tuesday. >>>>> > > any thought? >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Best, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Rafik >>>>> > > >>>>> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>>> > > From: Glen de Saint G?ry >>>>> > > Date: 2015-09-15 6:20 GMT+09:00 >>>>> > > Subject: Reminder: Time table for election of the GNSO Council >>>>> Chair 2015 >>>>> > > To: "KEITH DRAZEK (kdrazek at Verisign.com)" , >>>>> "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com)" < >>>>> michele at blacknight.com>, Rafik Dammak , "tony >>>>> holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" , >>>>> Phil Corwin , "'gregshatanipc at gmail.com' ( >>>>> gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" >>>>> > > Cc: "Cherie Stubbs (rysgsecretariat at gmail.com)" < >>>>> rysgsecretariat at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell < >>>>> darcy.southwell at endurance.com>, Glen de Saint G?ry , " >>>>> gnso-secs at icann.org" >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Dear All ? Contracted Parties House & Non Contracted Parties House, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Timetable for the election of the GNSO Council chair >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-03sep15-en.pdf >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Reminder, nominations are due 25 September 23:59 UTC! >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Nomination Process ? September to October 2015 >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Per the GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2.b): >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > ?Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO >>>>> Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate >>>>> its candidate.? >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of >>>>> the house nominating the candidate. Further, should the non-voting >>>>> Nominating Committee appointee (NCA) be elected as chair, he/she would be a >>>>> non-voting chair. The two houses may separately select the same candidate >>>>> from the pool of available candidates if they so wish. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process >>>>> at the annual meeting in Dublin, each house of the Council is asked to >>>>> submit its nominee for the GNSO Council Chair, for the term commencing at >>>>> the end of the 2015 ICANN Annual Meeting, not later than 23h59UTC on 25 >>>>> September 2015. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to ( >>>>> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org). The GNSO Secretariat will transmit >>>>> each House?s nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Nominees shall then submit a candidacy statement in writing to the >>>>> GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) as soon as >>>>> possible after they have been selected by their house and not later than >>>>> 23:59 UTC on 02 October 2015. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Procedure in Dublin ? October 2015 >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Each candidate will have the opportunity of meeting with the GNSO >>>>> Council during the open GNSO working sessions in Dublin over the course of >>>>> the weekend of 17/18 October 2015 (remote participation possible). >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Election of the chair by voting of the Council will take place >>>>> during the Council meeting in Dublin on Wednesday, 21 October 2015. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > In order for the vote to take place, the Council meeting will be >>>>> split in two parts: >>>>> > > >>>>> > > ? Standard, open and public Council meeting with the current >>>>> Council. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > ? Adjourn the meeting >>>>> > > >>>>> > > ? Re-seat the Council with the new Councilors. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > ? Re-start new meeting, with one specific agenda item: >>>>> > > Election of the Chair >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > The current chair term ends at end of 2015 Annual General Meeting >>>>> (AGM). The current Chair will therefore run the public council meeting and >>>>> the Thursday wrap-up meeting on 22 October 2015. The new Chair's first >>>>> meeting will be the first teleconference immediately following the 2015 AGM. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Please let me know if you have any questions. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Thank you. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Kind regards, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Glen >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Glen de Saint G?ry >>>>> > > GNSO Secretariat >>>>> > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org >>>>> > > http://gnso.icann.org >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > _______________________________________________ >>>>> > > PC-NCSG mailing list >>>>> > > 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Mar?lia Maciel* >>> Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito >>> Rio >>> Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law >>> School >>> http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts >>> >>> DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu >>> PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ >>> Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - >>> http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en >>> >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 18 13:19:04 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 19:19:04 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> Message-ID: Hi everyone, response from steve to David suggestion. the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we make decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the mailing list? Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Metalitz, Steven Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for To: Edward Morris , "avri at acm.org" Cc: David Cake , Amr Elsadr , Rafik Dammak , Stephanie Perrin < stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Marilia Maciel , Heather Forrest , "David Fares (dfares at 21cf.com)" , "Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" < gregshatanipc at gmail.com>, "Metalitz, Steven" , "Philip Corwin ( psc at vlaw-dc.com)" , Tony Harris , "Tony Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" NCSG colleagues, I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) and there is no objection to the position that if a CSG person (e.g., Heather) is elected council chair, then the council vice chair for our House should not come from CSG. I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to discuss her council chair candidacy. If that goes well, please let me know so that we can work out the specifics of making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 deadline. If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the vice chair selection process, using the modified version of Avri?s proposal, with the expectation that no one from CSG would be nominated. Steve Metalitz *From:* Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net] *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM *To:* avri at acm.org *Cc:* David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; Stephanie Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest *Subject:* Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more straightforward. Ed Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > this makes sense to me. > > avri > > > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late response to > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem at least to > shorten the process we also assume that there is interrelation between > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. Amr may > add more details here. >> >> This wasn?t originally my suggestion, but I > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve is correct. > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my personal > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to avoid having > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same stakeholder group of > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I > don?t think its a regular problem, I think there are some situations in > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council leadership > positions were held by the same SG. I don?t think we need to combine the > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that if we have > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG regardless of > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be more likely > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be some balance, > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egmorris1 Fri Sep 18 15:17:17 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 08:17:17 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, Thanks for doing all of this. Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going through this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? There are obviously many things going on here (Chair, VC, nomination, election, procedures) which overlap two different Councils and for which all moving parts are not yet in place. Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. Thanks, Ed ---------------------------------------- From: "Rafik Dammak" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM To: "NCSG-Policy" Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for Hi everyone, response from steve to David suggestion. the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we make decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the mailing list? Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Metalitz, Steven Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for To: Edward Morris , "avri at acm.org" Cc: David Cake , Amr Elsadr , Rafik Dammak , Stephanie Perrin , Marilia Maciel , Heather Forrest , "David Fares (dfares at 21cf.com)" , "Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" , "Metalitz, Steven" , "Philip Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com)" , Tony Harris , "Tony Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" NCSG colleagues, I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) and there is no objection to the position that if a CSG person (e.g., Heather) is elected council chair, then the council vice chair for our House should not come from CSG. I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to discuss her council chair candidacy. If that goes well, please let me know so that we can work out the specifics of making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 deadline. If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the vice chair selection process, using the modified version of Avri's proposal, with the expectation that no one from CSG would be nominated. Steve Metalitz From: Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM To: avri at acm.org Cc: David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; Stephanie Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest Subject: Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more straightforward. Ed Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > this makes sense to me. > > avri > > > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late response to > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem at least to > shorten the process we also assume that there is interrelation between > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. Amr may > add more details here. >> >> This wasn't originally my suggestion, but I > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve is correct. > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my personal > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to avoid having > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same stakeholder group of > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I > don't think its a regular problem, I think there are some situations in > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council leadership > positions were held by the same SG. I don't think we need to combine the > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that if we have > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG regardless of > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be more likely > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be some balance, > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 18 15:23:27 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 21:23:27 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> Message-ID: Hi Ed, We have to decide first who to nominate for chair election from NCPH. The deadline for ncph is 25th september. That process and timeline are already outlined by GNSO council. After that we will do election the vice chair at ncph level. Procedure for vice-chair was already agreed for this year. Rafik On Sep 18, 2015 9:17 PM, "Edward Morris" wrote: > Hi Rafik, > > Thanks for doing all of this. > > Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going through > this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? There are obviously > many things going on here (Chair, VC, nomination, election, procedures) > which overlap two different Councils and for which all moving parts are not > yet in place. > > Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > > ------------------------------ > *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM > *To*: "NCSG-Policy" > *Subject*: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time > for > > Hi everyone, > > response from steve to David suggestion. > the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we make > decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the mailing list? > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Metalitz, Steven > Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 > Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time > for > To: Edward Morris , "avri at acm.org" > Cc: David Cake , Amr Elsadr , > Rafik Dammak , Stephanie Perrin < > stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Marilia Maciel < > mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest , > "David Fares (dfares at 21cf.com)" , "Greg Shatan ( > gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" , "Metalitz, Steven" < > met at msk.com>, "Philip Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com)" , Tony > Harris , "Tony Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" > > > > > NCSG colleagues, > > > > I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) and there > is no objection to the position that if a CSG person (e.g., Heather) is > elected council chair, then the council vice chair for our House should not > come from CSG. > > > > I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to discuss her > council chair candidacy. If that goes well, please let me know so that we > can work out the specifics of making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 > deadline. > > > > If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the vice chair > selection process, using the modified version of Avri?s proposal, with the > expectation that no one from CSG would be nominated. > > > > Steve Metalitz > > > > *From:* Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM > *To:* avri at acm.org > *Cc:* David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; Stephanie > Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest > *Subject:* Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time > for > > > > I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more straightforward. > > Ed > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this makes sense to me. > > > > avri > > > > > > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: > >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr wrote: > >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late response to > > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak > > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question > > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem at least to > > shorten the process we also assume that there is interrelation between > > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. Amr may > > add more details here. >> >> This wasn?t originally my suggestion, but I > > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve is correct. > > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very > > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my personal > > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to avoid having > > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same stakeholder group of > > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I > > don?t think its a regular problem, I think there are some situations in > > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council leadership > > positions were held by the same SG. I don?t think we need to combine the > > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that if we have > > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG regardless of > > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this > > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be more likely > > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be some balance, > > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egmorris1 Fri Sep 18 15:37:10 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 08:37:10 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, Thanks for that. I just wanted to confirm we're only deciding Chair nomination and not Chair vote. In other words, any support for Heather or any other NCPH candidate now,does not necessarily oblige any of us to support the NCPH candidate in the final election. Obviously until we definitely know who, if anyone, the CPH is putting forward I wouldn't want to do that. Also, although she won't be involved in the nomination should we invite Stefania to be part of the call son she can get to know Heather a bit better in case she is nominated? Thanks again for tolerating my relative ignorance as, as Stephanie might say :), a newbie to the process. Ed ---------------------------------------- From: "Rafik Dammak" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:23 PM To: "Edward Morris" Cc: "NCSG-Policy" Subject: re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for Hi Ed, We have to decide first who to nominate for chair election from NCPH. The deadline for ncph is 25th september. That process and timeline are already outlined by GNSO council. After that we will do election the vice chair at ncph level. Procedure for vice-chair was already agreed for this year. Rafik On Sep 18, 2015 9:17 PM, "Edward Morris" wrote: Hi Rafik, Thanks for doing all of this. Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going through this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? There are obviously many things going on here (Chair, VC, nomination, election, procedures) which overlap two different Councils and for which all moving parts are not yet in place. Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. Thanks, Ed ---------------------------------------- From: "Rafik Dammak" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM To: "NCSG-Policy" Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for Hi everyone, response from steve to David suggestion. the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we make decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the mailing list? Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Metalitz, Steven Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for To: Edward Morris , "avri at acm.org" Cc: David Cake , Amr Elsadr , Rafik Dammak , Stephanie Perrin , Marilia Maciel , Heather Forrest , "David Fares (dfares at 21cf.com)" , "Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" , "Metalitz, Steven" , "Philip Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com)" , Tony Harris , "Tony Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" NCSG colleagues, I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) and there is no objection to the position that if a CSG person (e.g., Heather) is elected council chair, then the council vice chair for our House should not come from CSG. I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to discuss her council chair candidacy. If that goes well, please let me know so that we can work out the specifics of making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 deadline. If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the vice chair selection process, using the modified version of Avri's proposal, with the expectation that no one from CSG would be nominated. Steve Metalitz From: Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM To: avri at acm.org Cc: David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; Stephanie Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest Subject: Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more straightforward. Ed Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > this makes sense to me. > > avri > > > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late response to > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem at least to > shorten the process we also assume that there is interrelation between > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. Amr may > add more details here. >> >> This wasn't originally my suggestion, but I > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve is correct. > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my personal > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to avoid having > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same stakeholder group of > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I > don't think its a regular problem, I think there are some situations in > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council leadership > positions were held by the same SG. I don't think we need to combine the > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that if we have > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG regardless of > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be more likely > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be some balance, > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 18 15:40:33 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 21:40:33 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> Message-ID: Hi, The confcall is open to all membership. We are deciding for nomination only. Best, Rafik On Sep 18, 2015 9:37 PM, "Edward Morris" wrote: > Hi Rafik, > > Thanks for that. > > I just wanted to confirm we're only deciding Chair nomination and not > Chair vote. In other words, any support for Heather or any other NCPH > candidate now,does not necessarily oblige any of us to support the NCPH > candidate in the final election. Obviously until we definitely know who, if > anyone, the CPH is putting forward I wouldn't want to do that. > > Also, although she won't be involved in the nomination should we invite > Stefania to be part of the call son she can get to know Heather a bit > better in case she is nominated? > > Thanks again for tolerating my relative ignorance as, as Stephanie might > say :), a newbie to the process. > > Ed > > > ------------------------------ > *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:23 PM > *To*: "Edward Morris" > *Cc*: "NCSG-Policy" > *Subject*: re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time > for > > > Hi Ed, > > We have to decide first who to nominate for chair election from NCPH. The > deadline for ncph is 25th september. That process and timeline are already > outlined by GNSO council. After that we will do election the vice chair at > ncph level. > Procedure for vice-chair was already agreed for this year. > > Rafik > On Sep 18, 2015 9:17 PM, "Edward Morris" wrote: >> >> Hi Rafik, >> >> Thanks for doing all of this. >> >> Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going through >> this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? There are obviously >> many things going on here (Chair, VC, nomination, election, procedures) >> which overlap two different Councils and for which all moving parts are not >> yet in place. >> >> Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ed >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From*: "Rafik Dammak" >> *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM >> *To*: "NCSG-Policy" >> *Subject*: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: >> [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time >> for >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> response from steve to David suggestion. >> the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we make >> decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the mailing list? >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Metalitz, Steven >> Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 >> Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: >> [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time >> for >> To: Edward Morris , "avri at acm.org" >> Cc: David Cake , Amr Elsadr , >> Rafik Dammak , Stephanie Perrin < >> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Marilia Maciel < >> mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest , >> "David Fares (dfares at 21cf.com)" , "Greg Shatan ( >> gregshatanipc at gmail.com)" , "Metalitz, Steven" < >> met at msk.com>, "Philip Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com)" , Tony >> Harris , "Tony Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com)" >> >> >> >> >> NCSG colleagues, >> >> >> >> I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) and there >> is no objection to the position that if a CSG person (e.g., Heather) is >> elected council chair, then the council vice chair for our House should not >> come from CSG. >> >> >> >> I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to discuss her >> council chair candidacy. If that goes well, please let me know so that we >> can work out the specifics of making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 >> deadline. >> >> >> >> If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the vice chair >> selection process, using the modified version of Avri?s proposal, with the >> expectation that no one from CSG would be nominated. >> >> >> >> Steve Metalitz >> >> >> >> *From:* Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM >> *To:* avri at acm.org >> *Cc:* David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; Stephanie >> Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest >> *Subject:* Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: >> [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time >> for >> >> >> >> I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more straightforward. >> >> Ed >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > this makes sense to me. >> > >> > avri >> > >> > >> > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: >> >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late response to >> > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak >> > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question >> > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem at least to >> > shorten the process we also assume that there is interrelation between >> > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. Amr may >> > add more details here. >> >> This wasn?t originally my suggestion, but I >> > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve is correct. >> > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very >> > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my personal >> > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to avoid having >> > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same stakeholder group of >> > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I >> > don?t think its a regular problem, I think there are some situations in >> > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council leadership >> > positions were held by the same SG. I don?t think we need to combine the >> > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that if we have >> > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG regardless of >> > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this >> > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be more likely >> > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be some balance, >> > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David >> > >> > >> > >> > --- >> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> > >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Fri Sep 18 15:54:25 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 08:54:25 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> Message-ID: <55FC0981.1020100@acm.org> Hi, I expect the chair vote will actually be done in the first meeting of the new council in Dublin. The issue with not deciding on the v-chair until after we know about this election is that you cannot nominate for v-chair until after the election. you need a v-chair to run the election. but you will have at least one continuing v-chair from 2015, David, so he can run the election. then the ncph v-chair process can be done post Dublin before the first post Dublin council meeting. avri On 18-Sep-15 08:40, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi, > > The confcall is open to all membership. > We are deciding for nomination only. > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Sep 18, 2015 9:37 PM, "Edward Morris" > wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > > Thanks for that. > > I just wanted to confirm we're only deciding Chair nomination and > not Chair vote. In other words, any support for Heather or > any other NCPH candidate now,does not necessarily oblige any of us > to support the NCPH candidate in the final election. Obviously > until we definitely know who, if anyone, the CPH is putting > forward I wouldn't want to do that. > > Also, although she won't be involved in the nomination should we > invite Stefania to be part of the call son she can get to know > Heather a bit better in case she is nominated? > > Thanks again for tolerating my relative ignorance as, as Stephanie > might say :), a newbie to the process. > > Ed > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > > *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:23 PM > *To*: "Edward Morris" > > *Cc*: "NCSG-Policy" > > *Subject*: re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: > FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we > all have time for > > > Hi Ed, > > We have to decide first who to nominate for chair election from > NCPH. The deadline for ncph is 25th september. That process and > timeline are already outlined by GNSO council. After that we will > do election the vice chair at ncph level. > Procedure for vice-chair was already agreed for this year. > > Rafik > > On Sep 18, 2015 9:17 PM, "Edward Morris" > wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > > Thanks for doing all of this. > > Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going > through this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? > There are obviously many things going on here (Chair, VC, > nomination, election, procedures) which overlap two different > Councils and for which all moving parts are not yet in place. > > Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > > *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM > *To*: "NCSG-Policy" > > *Subject*: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: > FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what > we all have time for > > Hi everyone, > > response from steve to David suggestion. > the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we > make decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the > mailing list? > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Metalitz, Steven* > > Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 > Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we > all have time for > To: Edward Morris >, "avri at acm.org > " > > Cc: David Cake >, Amr Elsadr > >, Rafik > Dammak >, Stephanie Perrin > >, Marilia Maciel > >, > Heather Forrest >, "David Fares > (dfares at 21cf.com )" >, "Greg Shatan > (gregshatanipc at gmail.com )" > >, > "Metalitz, Steven" >, "Philip > Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com )" > >, Tony Harris > >, "Tony > Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com > )" > > > > > > NCSG colleagues, > > > > I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) > and there is no objection to the position that if a CSG person > (e.g., Heather) is elected council chair, then the council > vice chair for our House should not come from CSG. > > > > I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to > discuss her council chair candidacy. If that goes well, > please let me know so that we can work out the specifics of > making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 deadline. > > > > If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the > vice chair selection process, using the modified version of > Avri?s proposal, with the expectation that no one from CSG > would be nominated. > > > > Steve Metalitz > > > > *From:*Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net > ] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM > *To:* avri at acm.org > *Cc:* David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; > Stephanie Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest > *Subject:* Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we > all have time for > > > > I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more > straightforward. > > Ed > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this makes sense to me. > > > > avri > > > > > > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: > >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr > > wrote: > >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late > response to > > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak > > > > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question > > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem > at least to > > shorten the process we also assume that there is > interrelation between > > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. > Amr may > > add more details here. >> >> This wasn?t originally my > suggestion, but I > > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve > is correct. > > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very > > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my > personal > > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to > avoid having > > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same > stakeholder group of > > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I > > don?t think its a regular problem, I think there are some > situations in > > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council > leadership > > positions were held by the same SG. I don?t think we need to > combine the > > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that > if we have > > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG > regardless of > > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this > > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be > more likely > > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be > some balance, > > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From egmorris1 Fri Sep 18 16:00:17 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:00:17 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: <55FC0981.1020100@acm.org> References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> <55FC0981.1020100@acm.org> Message-ID: <8ae70c87b8b84580bac3d827eb74fde7@toast.net> Thanks Avri. That makes complete sense to me and clears up some of my confusion. Much appreciated. Ed ---------------------------------------- From: "Avri Doria" Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:54 PM To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for Hi, I expect the chair vote will actually be done in the first meeting of the new council in Dublin. The issue with not deciding on the v-chair until after we know about this election is that you cannot nominate for v-chair until after the election. you need a v-chair to run the election. but you will have at least one continuing v-chair from 2015, David, so he can run the election. then the ncph v-chair process can be done post Dublin before the first post Dublin council meeting. avri On 18-Sep-15 08:40, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi, > > The confcall is open to all membership. > We are deciding for nomination only. > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Sep 18, 2015 9:37 PM, "Edward Morris" > wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > > Thanks for that. > > I just wanted to confirm we're only deciding Chair nomination and > not Chair vote. In other words, any support for Heather or > any other NCPH candidate now,does not necessarily oblige any of us > to support the NCPH candidate in the final election. Obviously > until we definitely know who, if anyone, the CPH is putting > forward I wouldn't want to do that. > > Also, although she won't be involved in the nomination should we > invite Stefania to be part of the call son she can get to know > Heather a bit better in case she is nominated? > > Thanks again for tolerating my relative ignorance as, as Stephanie > might say :), a newbie to the process. > > Ed > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > > *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:23 PM > *To*: "Edward Morris" > > *Cc*: "NCSG-Policy" > > *Subject*: re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: > FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we > all have time for > > > Hi Ed, > > We have to decide first who to nominate for chair election from > NCPH. The deadline for ncph is 25th september. That process and > timeline are already outlined by GNSO council. After that we will > do election the vice chair at ncph level. > Procedure for vice-chair was already agreed for this year. > > Rafik > > On Sep 18, 2015 9:17 PM, "Edward Morris" > wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > > Thanks for doing all of this. > > Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going > through this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? > There are obviously many things going on here (Chair, VC, > nomination, election, procedures) which overlap two different > Councils and for which all moving parts are not yet in place. > > Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > > *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM > *To*: "NCSG-Policy" > > *Subject*: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: > FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what > we all have time for > > Hi everyone, > > response from steve to David suggestion. > the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we > make decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the > mailing list? > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Metalitz, Steven* > > Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 > Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we > all have time for > To: Edward Morris >, "avri at acm.org > " > > Cc: David Cake >, Amr Elsadr > >, Rafik > Dammak >, Stephanie Perrin > >, Marilia Maciel > >, > Heather Forrest >, "David Fares > (dfares at 21cf.com )" >, "Greg Shatan > (gregshatanipc at gmail.com )" > >, > "Metalitz, Steven" >, "Philip > Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com )" > >, Tony Harris > >, "Tony > Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com > )" > > > > > > NCSG colleagues, > > > > I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) > and there is no objection to the position that if a CSG person > (e.g., Heather) is elected council chair, then the council > vice chair for our House should not come from CSG. > > > > I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to > discuss her council chair candidacy. If that goes well, > please let me know so that we can work out the specifics of > making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 deadline. > > > > If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the > vice chair selection process, using the modified version of > Avri's proposal, with the expectation that no one from CSG > would be nominated. > > > > Steve Metalitz > > > > *From:*Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net > ] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM > *To:* avri at acm.org > *Cc:* David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; > Stephanie Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest > *Subject:* Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: > [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we > all have time for > > > > I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more > straightforward. > > Ed > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this makes sense to me. > > > > avri > > > > > > On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: > >>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr > > wrote: > >>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late > response to > > this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak > > > > wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question > > below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem > at least to > > shorten the process we also assume that there is > interrelation between > > selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. > Amr may > > add more details here. >> >> This wasn't originally my > suggestion, but I > > did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve > is correct. > > The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very > > different, and carried out by different groups. However, my > personal > > thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to > avoid having > > both a council chair and vice-chair from the same > stakeholder group of > > the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I > > don't think its a regular problem, I think there are some > situations in > > which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council > leadership > > positions were held by the same SG. I don't think we need to > combine the > > two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that > if we have > > an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG > regardless of > > any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this > > rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be > more likely > > to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be > some balance, > > and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David > > > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus > software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave Sun Sep 20 06:21:54 2015 From: dave (David Cake) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 11:21:54 +0800 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 References: Message-ID: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> Anyone we should put up for this? Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? David > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Marika Konings > Subject: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 > Date: 19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST > To: "council at gnso.icann.org" > > Reminder ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible to the Council mailing list. > > Best regards, > > Marika > > From: > on behalf of Marika Konings > > Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 > To: "council at gnso.icann.org " > > Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 > > Dear All, > > Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. If you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon as possible. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may need to consider the process for selecting its representative for this training programme. For further information, please see below and attached. > > Best regards, > > Marika > > From: At-Large Staff > > Date: Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 > To: Jonathan Robinson > > Cc: Glen De Saint Gery >, sandra hoferichter >, At-Large Staff > > Subject: Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 > > > Dear Jonathan, > > With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. > > For this programme, ONE seat is reserved for a representative from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. > Participants will have the chance to: > ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, > ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, > ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes > ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes > ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) > The preliminary programme is attached . > > Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. > > We would like to ask you to identify an incoming or current leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to participate in this programme and ask them to register at: https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home by Monday, 31 August. > > We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. > We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your group?s participants confirmed. > > Kind regards, > Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG > Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From avri Sun Sep 20 08:11:41 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 01:11:41 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> Message-ID: <55FE400D.50300@acm.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, This is only applicable if Tapani is already planning to attend as it does not include airfare. If he is going to be there, I support suggesting Tapani for the program, should he be interested. avri On 19-Sep-15 23:21, David Cake wrote: > Anyone we should put up for this? > Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? > Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? > > David > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From: *Marika Konings > >> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " > >> >> *Reminder* ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible to the Council mailing list. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marika >> >> From: > on behalf of Marika Konings > >> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " > >> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >> >> Dear All, >> >> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. _*If you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon as possible*_. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may need to consider the process for selecting its representative for this training programme. For further information, please see below and attached. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marika >> >> *From: *At-Large Staff > >> *Date: *Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >> *To: *Jonathan Robinson > >> *Cc: *Glen De Saint Gery >, sandra hoferichter >, At-Large Staff > >> *Subject: *Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >> >> >> Dear Jonathan, >> >> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. >> >> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current /_and_/ incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >> Participants will have the chance to: >> >> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >> >> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >> >> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >> >> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >> >> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >> >> The preliminary programme is attached . >> >> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >> >> *We would like to ask you to identify an** **incoming or current leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to register at: **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home **by Monday, 31 August.* >> >> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your group?s participants confirmed. >> >> Kind regards, >> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV/kANAAoJEOo+L8tCe36HvxAIALQ0Oz1eE8xM10nE+uhNiisk tD9twV1ElGh+Xfd//qgeUjpUwouHDITxmPHMHhediha25yIUOhWRX0DRJd2/Pt1e VZ/BXCaJe+NSmpH8YfRNWBi2c2+liCmI2QoNbz4of5iV+8cUxIH1VTW6V1jPD0WZ HLFpW57RcryNos9THtXv8Nn4tDnAG6ByFg1wYe5L/RtZoNhe5bFJnLQBeev1qpMI rL8RXYF80qiEYdVkpiBCHxJR9KM5drgnwg5s6WBNWL4kc894jNzlt44ealCJXDrm 2929VazpAv5vcDvCvfP4IDg7G+3aeAdVvG3IGatLKoimSxVzsPAeiJI8Rrhpiug= =6nSN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From egmorris1 Sun Sep 20 08:21:54 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 06:21:54 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <55FE400D.50300@acm.org> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FE400D.50300@acm.org> Message-ID: <906225FF-2B3E-47AD-AF17-E85B3AB03F86@toast.net> Tapani already did the program two years ago. Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 20, 2015, at 6:11 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > This is only applicable if Tapani is already planning to attend as it > does not include airfare. > > If he is going to be there, I support suggesting Tapani for the program, > should he be interested. > > avri > > >> On 19-Sep-15 23:21, David Cake wrote: >> Anyone we should put up for this? >> Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? >> Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? >> >> David >> >> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> *From: *Marika Konings > >>> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - > RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >>> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " > > >>> >>> *Reminder* ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible > to the Council mailing list. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marika >>> >>> From: > on behalf of Marika Konings > > >>> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " > > >>> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN > Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership > Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by > the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one > representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and > incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of > ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. _*If you or a member of > your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please submit > your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon as > possible*_. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, > but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that > many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process of > being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the > Council may need to consider the process for selecting its > representative for this training programme. For further information, > please see below and attached. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marika >>> >>> *From: *At-Large Staff > >>> *Date: *Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >>> *To: *Jonathan Robinson > >>> *Cc: *Glen De Saint Gery >, > sandra hoferichter >, > At-Large Staff > >>> *Subject: *Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme > (LTP) 2015 >>> >>> >>> Dear Jonathan, >>> >>> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires > about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in > Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>> >>> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative from > your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current /_and_/ > incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of > ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that > understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within > ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is challenging > for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN > and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help > incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current > leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation > skills. >>> Participants will have the chance to: >>> >>> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >>> >>> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >>> >>> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >>> >>> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal > effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >>> >>> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in > accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >>> >>> The preliminary programme is attached . >>> >>> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will > receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under > this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular > ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are > being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for > the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>> >>> *We would like to ask you to identify an** **incoming or current > leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available > to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to register at: > **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home > **by Monday, 31 August.* >>> >>> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. > It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should > provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of > ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All > participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their > views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later > during their terms. >>> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this > exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your > group?s participants confirmed. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >>> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV/kANAAoJEOo+L8tCe36HvxAIALQ0Oz1eE8xM10nE+uhNiisk > tD9twV1ElGh+Xfd//qgeUjpUwouHDITxmPHMHhediha25yIUOhWRX0DRJd2/Pt1e > VZ/BXCaJe+NSmpH8YfRNWBi2c2+liCmI2QoNbz4of5iV+8cUxIH1VTW6V1jPD0WZ > HLFpW57RcryNos9THtXv8Nn4tDnAG6ByFg1wYe5L/RtZoNhe5bFJnLQBeev1qpMI > rL8RXYF80qiEYdVkpiBCHxJR9KM5drgnwg5s6WBNWL4kc894jNzlt44ealCJXDrm > 2929VazpAv5vcDvCvfP4IDg7G+3aeAdVvG3IGatLKoimSxVzsPAeiJI8Rrhpiug= > =6nSN > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From wjdrake Sun Sep 20 11:27:17 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 10:27:17 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> Message-ID: NCUC did an open call for applications and selected Hanane Boujemi, one of our many representations of the much heralded Large organizations. Bill > On Sep 20, 2015, at 5:21 AM, David Cake wrote: > > Anyone we should put up for this? > Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? > Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? > > David > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: Marika Konings > >> Subject: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >> Date: 19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " > >> >> Reminder ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible to the Council mailing list. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marika >> >> From: > on behalf of Marika Konings > >> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " > >> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >> >> Dear All, >> >> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. If you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon as possible. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may need to consider the process for selecting its representative for this training programme. For further information, please see below and attached. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marika >> >> From: At-Large Staff > >> Date: Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >> To: Jonathan Robinson > >> Cc: Glen De Saint Gery >, sandra hoferichter >, At-Large Staff > >> Subject: Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >> >> >> Dear Jonathan, >> >> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. >> >> For this programme, ONE seat is reserved for a representative from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >> Participants will have the chance to: >> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >> The preliminary programme is attached . >> >> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >> >> We would like to ask you to identify an incoming or current leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to participate in this programme and ask them to register at: https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home by Monday, 31 August. >> >> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your group?s participants confirmed. >> >> Kind regards, >> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg ********************************************************* William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, ICANN, www.ncuc.org william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), www.williamdrake.org Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q ********************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Sun Sep 20 14:42:31 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 13:42:31 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> Message-ID: Hi, Can we get Stefania to participate in this (if she is willing)? She's going to be new on Council and may benefit from it. Also, is she subscribed to this list yet? She should be, no? Thanks. Amr Sent from mobile > On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:27 AM, William Drake wrote: > > NCUC did an open call for applications and selected Hanane Boujemi, one of our many representations of the much heralded Large organizations. > > Bill > >> On Sep 20, 2015, at 5:21 AM, David Cake wrote: >> >> Anyone we should put up for this? >> Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? >> Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? >> >> David >> >> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: Marika Konings >>> Subject: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>> Date: 19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org" >>> >>> Reminder ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible to the Council mailing list. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marika >>> >>> From: on behalf of Marika Konings >>> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org" >>> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. If you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon as possible. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may need to consider the process for selecting its representative for this training programme. For further information, please see below and attached. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marika >>> >>> From: At-Large Staff >>> Date: Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >>> To: Jonathan Robinson >>> Cc: Glen De Saint Gery , sandra hoferichter , At-Large Staff >>> Subject: Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>> >>> >>> Dear Jonathan, >>> >>> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>> >>> For this programme, ONE seat is reserved for a representative from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >>> Participants will have the chance to: >>> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >>> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >>> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >>> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >>> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >>> The preliminary programme is attached . >>> >>> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>> >>> We would like to ask you to identify an incoming or current leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to participate in this programme and ask them to register at: https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home by Monday, 31 August. >>> >>> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >>> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your group?s participants confirmed. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >>> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > ********************************************************* > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, > ICANN, www.ncuc.org > william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), > www.williamdrake.org > Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q > ********************************************************* > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Sun Sep 20 16:16:57 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 09:16:57 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> Message-ID: <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> Aren't the incoming council members already included? I thought this was an extra slot. avri On 20-Sep-15 07:42, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > Can we get Stefania to participate in this (if she is willing)? She's > going to be new on Council and may benefit from it. > > Also, is she subscribed to this list yet? She should be, no? > > Thanks. > > Amr > > Sent from mobile > > On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:27 AM, William Drake > wrote: > >> NCUC did an open call for applications and selected Hanane Boujemi, >> one of our many representations of the much heralded Large >> organizations. >> >> Bill >> >>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 5:21 AM, David Cake >> > wrote: >>> >>> Anyone we should put up for this? >>> Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? >>> Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>> >>>> *From: *Marika Konings >>> > >>>> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation >>>> - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >>>> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >>>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " >>>> > >>>> >>>> *Reminder* ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as >>>> possible to the Council mailing list. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Marika >>>> >>>> From: >>> > on behalf of Marika Konings >>>> > >>>> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >>>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " >>>> > >>>> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN >>>> Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>>> >>>> Dear All, >>>> >>>> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership >>>> Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected >>>> by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select >>>> one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for >>>> current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the >>>> complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. _*If >>>> you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for >>>> this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the >>>> Council mailing list as soon as possible*_. The official deadline >>>> for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the >>>> Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership >>>> positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If >>>> more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may >>>> need to consider the process for selecting its representative for >>>> this training programme. For further information, please see below >>>> and attached. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Marika >>>> >>>> *From: *At-Large Staff >>> > >>>> *Date: *Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >>>> *To: *Jonathan Robinson >>> > >>>> *Cc: *Glen De Saint Gery >, >>>> sandra hoferichter >>> >, At-Large Staff >>>> > >>>> *Subject: *Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme >>>> (LTP) 2015 >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear Jonathan, >>>> >>>> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires >>>> about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take >>>> place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the >>>> ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>> >>>> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative >>>> from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for >>>> current /_and_/ incoming leaders, helping them to better understand >>>> the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We >>>> are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics >>>> discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder >>>> groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for >>>> experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking >>>> considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good >>>> start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to >>>> strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >>>> Participants will have the chance to: >>>> >>>> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >>>> >>>> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >>>> >>>> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >>>> >>>> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused >>>> personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >>>> >>>> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in >>>> accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >>>> >>>> The preliminary programme is attached . >>>> >>>> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants >>>> will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be >>>> covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally >>>> covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the >>>> leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for >>>> their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>> >>>> *We would like to ask you to identify an** **incoming or current >>>> leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and >>>> available to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to >>>> register >>>> at: **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home **by >>>> Monday, 31 August.* >>>> >>>> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. >>>> It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and >>>> should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their >>>> knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and >>>> leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake >>>> in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate >>>> cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >>>> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this >>>> exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having >>>> your group?s participants confirmed. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >>>> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> ********************************************************* >> William J. Drake >> International Fellow & Lecturer >> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ >> University of Zurich, Switzerland >> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, >> ICANN, www.ncuc.org >> william.drake at uzh.ch >> (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com >> (lists), >> www.williamdrake.org >> /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q >> ********************************************************* >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From avri Sun Sep 20 16:21:04 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 09:21:04 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> Message-ID: <55FEB2C0.6060707@acm.org> hi, or is my confusion that this is the several day cross ACSO training and not the days traingsharing of the council. Tapani did that the same year I did, its first year. If so Stefania would be a good candidate for the course. if she could stand it. btw, have all of our council members elect been added to this list? probably should be. though i expect this is presumptuous and it has already been take care of by leadership. avri On 20-Sep-15 09:16, Avri Doria wrote: > Aren't the incoming council members already included? > I thought this was an extra slot. > > avri > > > On 20-Sep-15 07:42, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Can we get Stefania to participate in this (if she is willing)? She's >> going to be new on Council and may benefit from it. >> >> Also, is she subscribed to this list yet? She should be, no? >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> >> Sent from mobile >> >> On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:27 AM, William Drake > > wrote: >> >>> NCUC did an open call for applications and selected Hanane Boujemi, >>> one of our many representations of the much heralded Large >>> organizations. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 5:21 AM, David Cake >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Anyone we should put up for this? >>>> Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? >>>> Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>> >>>>> *From: *Marika Konings >>>> > >>>>> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation >>>>> - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >>>>> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >>>>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> *Reminder* ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as >>>>> possible to the Council mailing list. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Marika >>>>> >>>>> From: >>>> > on behalf of Marika Konings >>>>> > >>>>> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >>>>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN >>>>> Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>>>> >>>>> Dear All, >>>>> >>>>> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership >>>>> Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected >>>>> by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select >>>>> one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for >>>>> current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the >>>>> complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. _*If >>>>> you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for >>>>> this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the >>>>> Council mailing list as soon as possible*_. The official deadline >>>>> for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the >>>>> Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership >>>>> positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If >>>>> more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may >>>>> need to consider the process for selecting its representative for >>>>> this training programme. For further information, please see below >>>>> and attached. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Marika >>>>> >>>>> *From: *At-Large Staff >>>> > >>>>> *Date: *Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >>>>> *To: *Jonathan Robinson >>>> > >>>>> *Cc: *Glen De Saint Gery >, >>>>> sandra hoferichter >>>> >, At-Large Staff >>>>> > >>>>> *Subject: *Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme >>>>> (LTP) 2015 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear Jonathan, >>>>> >>>>> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires >>>>> about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take >>>>> place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the >>>>> ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>>> >>>>> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative >>>>> from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for >>>>> current /_and_/ incoming leaders, helping them to better understand >>>>> the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We >>>>> are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics >>>>> discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder >>>>> groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for >>>>> experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking >>>>> considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good >>>>> start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to >>>>> strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >>>>> Participants will have the chance to: >>>>> >>>>> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >>>>> >>>>> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >>>>> >>>>> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >>>>> >>>>> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused >>>>> personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >>>>> >>>>> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in >>>>> accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >>>>> >>>>> The preliminary programme is attached . >>>>> >>>>> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants >>>>> will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be >>>>> covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally >>>>> covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the >>>>> leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for >>>>> their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>>> >>>>> *We would like to ask you to identify an** **incoming or current >>>>> leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and >>>>> available to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to >>>>> register >>>>> at: **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home **by >>>>> Monday, 31 August.* >>>>> >>>>> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. >>>>> It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and >>>>> should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their >>>>> knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and >>>>> leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake >>>>> in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate >>>>> cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >>>>> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this >>>>> exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having >>>>> your group?s participants confirmed. >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >>>>> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> ********************************************************* >>> William J. Drake >>> International Fellow & Lecturer >>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ >>> University of Zurich, Switzerland >>> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, >>> ICANN, www.ncuc.org >>> william.drake at uzh.ch >>> (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com >>> (lists), >>> www.williamdrake.org >>> /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q >>> ********************************************************* >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> 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 > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From stephanie.perrin Sun Sep 20 23:24:55 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 16:24:55 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> Message-ID: <55FF1617.9080404@mail.utoronto.ca> No they are not, you have to apply. I went last year... Stephanie On 2015-09-20 9:16, Avri Doria wrote: > Aren't the incoming council members already included? > I thought this was an extra slot. > > avri > > > On 20-Sep-15 07:42, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Can we get Stefania to participate in this (if she is willing)? She's >> going to be new on Council and may benefit from it. >> >> Also, is she subscribed to this list yet? She should be, no? >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> >> Sent from mobile >> >> On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:27 AM, William Drake > > wrote: >> >>> NCUC did an open call for applications and selected Hanane Boujemi, >>> one of our many representations of the much heralded Large >>> organizations. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 5:21 AM, David Cake >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Anyone we should put up for this? >>>> Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? >>>> Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>> >>>>> *From: *Marika Konings >>>> > >>>>> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation >>>>> - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >>>>> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >>>>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> *Reminder* ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as >>>>> possible to the Council mailing list. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Marika >>>>> >>>>> From: >>>> > on behalf of Marika Konings >>>>> > >>>>> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >>>>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN >>>>> Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>>>> >>>>> Dear All, >>>>> >>>>> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership >>>>> Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected >>>>> by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select >>>>> one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for >>>>> current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the >>>>> complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. _*If >>>>> you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for >>>>> this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the >>>>> Council mailing list as soon as possible*_. The official deadline >>>>> for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the >>>>> Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership >>>>> positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If >>>>> more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may >>>>> need to consider the process for selecting its representative for >>>>> this training programme. For further information, please see below >>>>> and attached. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Marika >>>>> >>>>> *From: *At-Large Staff >>>> > >>>>> *Date: *Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >>>>> *To: *Jonathan Robinson >>>> > >>>>> *Cc: *Glen De Saint Gery >, >>>>> sandra hoferichter >>>> >, At-Large Staff >>>>> > >>>>> *Subject: *Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme >>>>> (LTP) 2015 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear Jonathan, >>>>> >>>>> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires >>>>> about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take >>>>> place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the >>>>> ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>>> >>>>> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative >>>>> from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for >>>>> current /_and_/ incoming leaders, helping them to better understand >>>>> the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We >>>>> are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics >>>>> discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder >>>>> groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for >>>>> experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking >>>>> considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good >>>>> start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to >>>>> strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >>>>> Participants will have the chance to: >>>>> >>>>> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >>>>> >>>>> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >>>>> >>>>> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >>>>> >>>>> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused >>>>> personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >>>>> >>>>> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in >>>>> accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >>>>> >>>>> The preliminary programme is attached . >>>>> >>>>> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants >>>>> will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be >>>>> covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally >>>>> covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the >>>>> leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for >>>>> their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>>> >>>>> *We would like to ask you to identify an** **incoming or current >>>>> leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and >>>>> available to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to >>>>> register >>>>> at: **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home **by >>>>> Monday, 31 August.* >>>>> >>>>> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. >>>>> It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and >>>>> should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their >>>>> knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and >>>>> leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake >>>>> in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate >>>>> cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >>>>> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this >>>>> exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having >>>>> your group?s participants confirmed. >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >>>>> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> ********************************************************* >>> William J. Drake >>> International Fellow & Lecturer >>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ >>> University of Zurich, Switzerland >>> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, >>> ICANN, www.ncuc.org >>> william.drake at uzh.ch >>> (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com >>> (lists), >>> www.williamdrake.org >>> /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q >>> ********************************************************* >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> 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 > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From stephanie.perrin Sun Sep 20 23:43:33 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 16:43:33 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> Message-ID: <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> I enjoyed it last year, it is a great chance to meet and bond with other stakeholders and incoming Board members...I met Ayesha there. Tapani you should go!! cheers steph On 2015-09-19 23:21, David Cake wrote: > Anyone we should put up for this? > Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? > Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? > > David > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From: *Marika Konings > > >> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - >> RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " >> > >> >> *Reminder*? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible >> to the Council mailing list. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marika >> >> From:> > on behalf of Marika Konings >> > >> Date:Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >> To:"council at gnso.icann.org " >> > >> Subject:[council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN >> Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >> >> Dear All, >> >> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership >> Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected >> by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select >> one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current >> and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the >> complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?._*If you >> or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for this >> slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the Council >> mailing list as soon as possible*_. The official deadline for >> nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the Leadership >> Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership positions in >> the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If more than one >> expression of interest is received, the Council may need to consider >> the process for selecting its representative for this training >> programme. For further information, please see below and attached. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marika >> >> *From:*At-Large Staff > > >> *Date:*Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >> *To:*Jonathan Robinson > > >> *Cc:*Glen De Saint Gery >, >> sandra hoferichter > >, At-Large Staff >> > >> *Subject:*Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme >> (LTP) 2015 >> Dear Jonathan, >> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires >> about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place >> in Dublin, 14 through 16 October,one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. >> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative from >> your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current >> /_and_/ incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the >> complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are >> aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics >> discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder >> groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for >> experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking >> considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good >> start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to >> strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >> Participants will have the chance to: >> >> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >> >> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >> >> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >> >> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal >> effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >> >> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in >> accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >> >> The preliminary programme is attached . >> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will >> receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under >> this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the >> regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you >> select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to >> Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >> *We would like to ask you to identify an****incoming or current >> leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and >> available to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to register >> at: >> **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home >> **by Monday, 31 August.* >> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. >> It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should >> provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of >> ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All >> participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of >> their views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration >> later during their terms. >> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this >> exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having >> your group?s participants confirmed. >> Kind regards, >> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lanfran Sun Sep 20 23:47:59 2015 From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 16:47:59 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <55FF1617.9080404@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> <55FF1617.9080404@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <55FF1B7F.10003@yorku.ca> NCSG Policy Committee, I may have missed something here as a result of a heavy work load and endless travel for the past several weeks but I am left with some confusion here. Is this supposed to be a recommendation from the stakeholder group NCSG level, or is it a free-for-all with an individual nomination coming from any quarter including a user or organizational (NCUC or NPOC), or from any concerned individual stakeholder? Process, (and the appropriation of process?) seem to be all over the map here. Can I get some clarification? Sam -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tapani.tarvainen Sun Sep 20 23:55:27 2015 From: tapani.tarvainen (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 23:55:27 +0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> I did it already in 2013, and yes it was indeed good. Tapani On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 04:43:33PM -0400, Stephanie Perrin (stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca) wrote: > I enjoyed it last year, it is a great chance to meet and bond with other > stakeholders and incoming Board members...I met Ayesha there. Tapani you > should go!! > cheers steph > > On 2015-09-19 23:21, David Cake wrote: > >Anyone we should put up for this? > >Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? > >Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? > > > >David > > > > > >>Begin forwarded message: > >> > >>*From: *Marika Konings >>> > >>*Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - > >>RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* > >>*Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST > >>*To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " > >>> > >> > >>*Reminder*? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible to > >>the Council mailing list. > >> > >>Best regards, > >> > >>Marika > >> > >>From: >>> on behalf of Marika Konings > >>> > >>Date:Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 > >>To:"council at gnso.icann.org " > >>> > >>Subject:[council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN > >>Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 > >> > >>Dear All, > >> > >>Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership Training > >>Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by the GNSO > >>Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one > >>representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and > >>incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of > >>ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?._*If you or a member of > >>your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please submit > >>your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon as > >>possible*_. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, > >>but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that > >>many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process of > >>being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the > >>Council may need to consider the process for selecting its > >>representative for this training programme. For further information, > >>please see below and attached. > >> > >>Best regards, > >> > >>Marika > >> > >>*From:*At-Large Staff >>> > >>*Date:*Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 > >>*To:*Jonathan Robinson >>> > >>*Cc:*Glen De Saint Gery >, sandra > >>hoferichter >, At-Large > >>Staff > > >>*Subject:*Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) > >>2015 > >>Dear Jonathan, > >>With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires about > >>the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in > >>Dublin, 14 through 16 October,one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. > >>For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative from > >>your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current /_and_/ > >>incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of > >>ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that > >>understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within > >>ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is challenging > >>for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN > >>and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help > >>incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current > >>leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation > >>skills. > >>Participants will have the chance to: > >> > >>? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, > >> > >>? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, > >> > >>? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes > >> > >>? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal > >>effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes > >> > >>? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in accordance > >>to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) > >> > >>The preliminary programme is attached . > >>Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will > >>receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under > >>this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular > >>ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are > >>being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for > >>the ICANN 54 Meeting. > >>*We would like to ask you to identify an****incoming or current leader > >>from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to > >>participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to register at: > >>**https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home > >>**by Monday, 31 August.* > >>We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. It > >>is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should > >>provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of > >>ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All > >>participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their > >>views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later > >>during their terms. > >>We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this exciting > >>Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your group?s > >>participants confirmed. > >>Kind regards, > >>Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG > >>Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >PC-NCSG mailing list > >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 From rafik.dammak Mon Sep 21 00:56:19 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:19 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: Hi, Just to clarify here: -the training is prior to the icann meeting. It includes participants from all SO/AC and the board itself. - there was call for participants, anyone from SG/C interested by the training has to apply by himself with the online form and supposed to check with his group to confirm. - GNSO council got an additional seat and that is the discussion about whom can get that. -GNSO councillors have the induction day in friday just after the meeting.that includes all councillors from NCSG. No action needed here, just ensuring that they are staying till saturday. The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. Best, Rafik On Sep 21, 2015 5:55 AM, "Tapani Tarvainen" wrote: > I did it already in 2013, and yes it was indeed good. > > Tapani > > On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 04:43:33PM -0400, Stephanie Perrin ( > stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca) wrote: > > > I enjoyed it last year, it is a great chance to meet and bond with other > > stakeholders and incoming Board members...I met Ayesha there. Tapani you > > should go!! > > cheers steph > > > > On 2015-09-19 23:21, David Cake wrote: > > >Anyone we should put up for this? > > >Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? > > >Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? > > > > > >David > > > > > > > > >>Begin forwarded message: > > >> > > >>*From: *Marika Konings > >>> > > >>*Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - > > >>RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* > > >>*Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST > > >>*To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " > > >>> > > >> > > >>*Reminder*? candidate names should be submitted as soon as possible to > > >>the Council mailing list. > > >> > > >>Best regards, > > >> > > >>Marika > > >> > > >>From: > >>> on behalf of Marika Konings > > >>> > > >>Date:Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 > > >>To:"council at gnso.icann.org " > > >>> > > >>Subject:[council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN > > >>Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 > > >> > > >>Dear All, > > >> > > >>Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership > Training > > >>Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by the GNSO > > >>Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one > > >>representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for current and > > >>incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of > > >>ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?._*If you or a member of > > >>your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, please > submit > > >>your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list as soon > as > > >>possible*_. The official deadline for nominations has already passed, > > >>but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are aware that > > >>many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the process > of > > >>being filled. If more than one expression of interest is received, the > > >>Council may need to consider the process for selecting its > > >>representative for this training programme. For further information, > > >>please see below and attached. > > >> > > >>Best regards, > > >> > > >>Marika > > >> > > >>*From:*At-Large Staff > >>> > > >>*Date:*Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 > > >>*To:*Jonathan Robinson > >>> > > >>*Cc:*Glen De Saint Gery >, > sandra > > >>hoferichter >, > At-Large > > >>Staff > > > >>*Subject:*Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) > > >>2015 > > >>Dear Jonathan, > > >>With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires about > > >>the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in > > >>Dublin, 14 through 16 October,one week prior to the ICANN 54 Meeting. > > >>For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative from > > >>your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current /_and_/ > > >>incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the complexity of > > >>ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that > > >>understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed within > > >>ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is > challenging > > >>for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced leaders. ICANN > > >>and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order to help > > >>incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide current > > >>leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and facilitation > > >>skills. > > >>Participants will have the chance to: > > >> > > >>? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, > > >> > > >>? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, > > >> > > >>? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes > > >> > > >>? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal > > >>effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes > > >> > > >>? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in accordance > > >>to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) > > >> > > >>The preliminary programme is attached . > > >>Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants will > > >>receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be covered under > > >>this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the regular > > >>ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you select are > > >>being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to Dublin for > > >>the ICANN 54 Meeting. > > >>*We would like to ask you to identify an****incoming or current leader > > >>from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to > > >>participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to register at: > > >>** > https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home > > >>**by Monday, 31 August.* > > >>We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. It > > >>is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should > > >>provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of > > >>ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership skills. All > > >>participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange of their > > >>views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration later > > >>during their terms. > > >>We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this exciting > > >>Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your group?s > > >>participants confirmed. > > >>Kind regards, > > >>Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG > > >>Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >PC-NCSG mailing list > > >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 > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Mon Sep 21 02:27:05 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 19:27:05 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: <55FF40C9.2060400@acm.org> Hi, thanks for the clarification. but if the GNSO council gets to pick someone, do we need to nominate someone (having donned my asbestos suit) not sure what process the gnso council will use to decide this one. my recommendation to the g-council would be that it should be one of the newly elected, and i advocate the council draw a name from a hat that includes the names of all newly elected who are interested, available who have not already attended. either that have them meet at dawn with sabres cheers, avri On 20-Sep-15 17:56, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi, > > Just to clarify here: > -the training is prior to the icann meeting. It includes participants > from all SO/AC and the board itself. > - there was call for participants, anyone from SG/C interested by the > training has to apply by himself with the online form and supposed to > check with his group to confirm. > - GNSO council got an additional seat and that is the discussion about > whom can get that. > -GNSO councillors have the induction day in friday just after the > meeting.that includes all councillors from NCSG. No action needed > here, just ensuring that they are staying till saturday. > > The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such slot > but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Sep 21, 2015 5:55 AM, "Tapani Tarvainen" > wrote: > > I did it already in 2013, and yes it was indeed good. > > Tapani > > On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 04:43:33PM -0400, Stephanie Perrin > (stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca > ) wrote: > > > I enjoyed it last year, it is a great chance to meet and bond > with other > > stakeholders and incoming Board members...I met Ayesha there. > Tapani you > > should go!! > > cheers steph > > > > On 2015-09-19 23:21, David Cake wrote: > > >Anyone we should put up for this? > > >Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? > > >Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? > > > > > >David > > > > > > > > >>Begin forwarded message: > > >> > > >>*From: *Marika Konings > > >> >> > > >>*Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / > Invitation - > > >>RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* > > >>*Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST > > >>*To: *"council at gnso.icann.org > >" > > >> > >> > > >> > > >>*Reminder*? candidate names should be submitted as soon as > possible to > > >>the Council mailing list. > > >> > > >>Best regards, > > >> > > >>Marika > > >> > > >>From: > > >> >> on behalf of Marika Konings > > >> > >> > > >>Date:Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 > > >>To:"council at gnso.icann.org > >" > > >> > >> > > >>Subject:[council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN > > >>Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 > > >> > > >>Dear All, > > >> > > >>Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN > Leadership Training > > >>Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected by > the GNSO > > >>Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select one > > >>representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for > current and > > >>incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the > complexity of > > >>ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?._*If you or a > member of > > >>your SG/C is interested in being considered for this slot, > please submit > > >>your/their expression of interest to the Council mailing list > as soon as > > >>possible*_. The official deadline for nominations has already > passed, > > >>but the organisers of the Leadership Training Programme are > aware that > > >>many of the leadership positions in the GNSO are still in the > process of > > >>being filled. If more than one expression of interest is > received, the > > >>Council may need to consider the process for selecting its > > >>representative for this training programme. For further > information, > > >>please see below and attached. > > >> > > >>Best regards, > > >> > > >>Marika > > >> > > >>*From:*At-Large Staff > > >>>> > > >>*Date:*Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 > > >>*To:*Jonathan Robinson > > >> >> > > >>*Cc:*Glen De Saint Gery >>, sandra > > >>hoferichter > >>, At-Large > > >>Staff >> > > >>*Subject:*Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training > Programme (LTP) > > >>2015 > > >>Dear Jonathan, > > >>With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos > Aires about > > >>the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take place in > > >>Dublin, 14 through 16 October,one week prior to the ICANN 54 > Meeting. > > >>For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a > representative from > > >>your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for current > /_and_/ > > >>incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the > complexity of > > >>ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We are aware that > > >>understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics discussed > within > > >>ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder groups is > challenging > > >>for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for experienced > leaders. ICANN > > >>and the community are undertaking considerable effort in order > to help > > >>incoming leaders have a good start in their term and provide > current > > >>leaders the opportunity to strengthen their leadership and > facilitation > > >>skills. > > >>Participants will have the chance to: > > >> > > >>? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, > > >> > > >>? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, > > >> > > >>? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes > > >> > > >>? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused personal > > >>effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes > > >> > > >>? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in > accordance > > >>to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) > > >> > > >>The preliminary programme is attached . > > >>Accommodation for participants will be covered and > participants will > > >>receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be > covered under > > >>this programme as incoming leaders are normally covered by the > regular > > >>ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the leaders you > select are > > >>being covered by ICANN Travel Support for their flights to > Dublin for > > >>the ICANN 54 Meeting. > > >>*We would like to ask you to identify an****incoming or > current leader > > >>from your stakeholder group, which are interested and available to > > >>participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to register at: > > > >>**https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home > > >>**by Monday, 31 August.* > > >>We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your > community. It > > >>is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and should > > >>provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their > knowledge of > > >>ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and leadership > skills. All > > >>participants will be encouraged to partake in an open exchange > of their > > >>views as this will facilitate cross-constituency collaboration > later > > >>during their terms. > > >>We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this > exciting > > >>Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having your > group?s > > >>participants confirmed. > > >>Kind regards, > > >>Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG > > >>Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >PC-NCSG mailing list > > >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 > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From wjdrake Mon Sep 21 09:42:08 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 08:42:08 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: Hi > On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. > Indeed the process needs a tweak at ALAC?s end. They told me there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.? So I did an open call and put the Exec. Comm through the exercise of debating and deciding among contending apps, which took time. Then maybe a month or so after notifying them of the resulting selection (Hanane Boujemi of Hivos) I got a note from Gisella and Sandra saying they?d received a direct app from a newish member who?d never said anything on our list etc. and would we support providing a second slot to NCUC. This seemed a bit arbitrary and would have been unfair to the member who went through our process and was turned down, so I said if they want to give NCUC two slots then I should do another open call in fairness to all and their preferred addition could apply and probably get it, since the losing applicant has since decided not to come to Dublin. End of conversation. Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lanfran Mon Sep 21 20:46:41 2015 From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:46:41 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> All, Still seeking clarity on process here. Does this mean that there are no "slots" for NCSG nor for NPOC, and that somehow the individual users constituency (NCUC) has a preferred entitlement here, and that maybe that entitlement extends to a preference over individual applications (which were called for). Having to have learned two sets of principles for governance procedures (Canada, USA) is there a third one with unusual principles that I missed? Sam (NPOC Policy Chair) /On 21/09/2015 2:42 AM, William Drake wrote:// / > /Hi/ > / > / >> /On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Rafik Dammak > //> wrote:/ >> / >> / >> >> /The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such >> slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it./ >> > /Indeed the process needs a tweak at ALAC?s end. They told me there > was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.? So I did an open call and > put the Exec. Comm through the exercise of debating and deciding among > contending apps, which took time. Then maybe a month or so after > notifying them of the resulting selection (Hanane Boujemi of Hivos) I > got a note from Gisella and Sandra saying they?d received a direct app > from a newish member who?d never said anything on our list etc. and > would we support providing a second slot to NCUC. This seemed a bit > arbitrary and would have been unfair to the member who went through > our process and was turned down, so I said if they want to give NCUC > two slots then I should do another open call in fairness to all and > their preferred addition could apply and probably get it, since the > losing applicant has since decided not to come to Dublin. End of > conversation./ > / > / > /Bill/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Mon Sep 21 21:39:50 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 20:39:50 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> Message-ID: <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> Hi Sam, I?m not sure how you reached the conclusion that the NCUC has any entitlement here. Please refer to Rafik?s clarification earlier on this thread. If NPOC hasn?t been asked to provide applicants to the leadership training program, then I suggest that NPOC leadership take this up with Glen or At-Large staff. Alternatively (or additionally), just ask your members to submit applications here: http://www.formpl.us/form/0B10rrZn6kIB0T0ctVG5DSjd6RVk/ An unrelated question ? why are you referring to the NCUC as ?the individual users constituency?? That isn?t what NCUC stands for, nor does the term accurately represent its nature or membership. I?m guessing you already know this. :) Thanks. Amr > On Sep 21, 2015, at 7:46 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > > All, > > Still seeking clarity on process here. Does this mean that there are no "slots" for NCSG nor for NPOC, and that somehow the individual users constituency (NCUC) has a preferred entitlement here, and that maybe that entitlement extends to a preference over individual applications (which were called for). Having to have learned two sets of principles for governance procedures (Canada, USA) is there a third one with unusual principles that I missed? > > Sam (NPOC Policy Chair) > > On 21/09/2015 2:42 AM, William Drake wrote: >> Hi >> >>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>> >>> The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. >>> >> Indeed the process needs a tweak at ALAC?s end. They told me there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.? So I did an open call and put the Exec. Comm through the exercise of debating and deciding among contending apps, which took time. Then maybe a month or so after notifying them of the resulting selection (Hanane Boujemi of Hivos) I got a note from Gisella and Sandra saying they?d received a direct app from a newish member who?d never said anything on our list etc. and would we support providing a second slot to NCUC. This seemed a bit arbitrary and would have been unfair to the member who went through our process and was turned down, so I said if they want to give NCUC two slots then I should do another open call in fairness to all and their preferred addition could apply and probably get it, since the losing applicant has since decided not to come to Dublin. End of conversation. >> >> Bill >> > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From lanfran Mon Sep 21 21:57:12 2015 From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:57:12 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> Amr, I stand corrected on my typo w/r to the acronym NCUC [non-commercial,...including individuals]. My specific reference to NCUC came from Bill Drake's posting in which he wrote, among other things, that "there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.?", hence my opening comment seeking clarity on process here. As for individual members of NCSG who fell that they are qualified, the more that apply the better. I support that and am urging younger members to apply. Sam On 21/09/2015 2:39 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: Hi Sam, I?m not sure how you reached the conclusion that the NCUC has any entitlement here. Please refer to Rafik?s clarification earlier on this thread. If NPOC hasn?t been asked to provide applicants to the leadership training program, then I suggest that NPOC leadership take this up with Glen or At-Large staff. Alternatively (or additionally), just ask your members to submit applications here: http://www.formpl.us/form/0B10rrZn6kIB0T0ctVG5DSjd6RVk/ An unrelated question ? why are you referring to the NCUC as ?the individual users constituency?? That isn?t what NCUC stands for, nor does the term accurately represent its nature or membership. I?m guessing you already know this. :) Thanks. Amr >> On Sep 21, 2015, at 7:46 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: >> All, Still seeking clarity on process here. Does this mean that there >> are no "slots" for NCSG nor for NPOC, and that somehow the individual >> users constituency (NCUC) has a preferred entitlement here, and that >> maybe that entitlement extends to a preference over individual >> applications (which were called for). Having to have learned two sets >> of principles for governance procedures (Canada, USA) is there a >> third one with unusual principles that I missed? Sam (NPOC Policy >> Chair) On 21/09/2015 2:42 AM, William Drake wrote: >>> Hi >>>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Rafik Dammak >>>> wrote: The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to >>>> such slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. >>> Indeed the process needs a tweak at ALAC?s end. They told me there >>> was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.? So I did an open call and >>> put the Exec. Comm through the exercise of debating and deciding >>> among contending apps, which took time. Then maybe a month or so >>> after notifying them of the resulting selection (Hanane Boujemi of >>> Hivos) I got a note from Gisella and Sandra saying they?d received a >>> direct app from a newish member who?d never said anything on our >>> list etc. and would we support providing a second slot to NCUC. This >>> seemed a bit arbitrary and would have been unfair to the member who >>> went through our process and was turned down, so I said if they want >>> to give NCUC two slots then I should do another open call in >>> fairness to all and their preferred addition could apply and >>> probably get it, since the losing applicant has since decided not to >>> come to Dublin. End of conversation. Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Tue Sep 22 00:46:59 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 06:46:59 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> Message-ID: Hi Sam, NPOC got a slot. Did you check with NPOC leadership about that before ? NCSG got a slot too, only James approached me about his interest to apply for it. They may be other but they didn't inform me. The deadline passed weeks ago. What we are talking about now is 1 slot available to GNSO council and ther is suggestion to propose the newly elected ncsg councillor . Best, Rafik On Sep 22, 2015 3:57 AM, "Sam Lanfranco" wrote: > Amr, > > I stand corrected on my typo w/r to the acronym NCUC > [non-commercial,...including individuals]. > > My specific reference to NCUC came from Bill Drake's posting in which he > wrote, among other things, that "there was one slot for a ?NCUC > representative.?", hence my opening comment seeking clarity on process here. > > As for individual members of NCSG who fell that they are qualified, the > more that apply the better. I support that and am urging younger members to > apply. > > Sam > > On 21/09/2015 2:39 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi Sam, I?m not sure how you reached the conclusion that the NCUC has any > entitlement here. Please refer to Rafik?s clarification earlier on this > thread. If NPOC hasn?t been asked to provide applicants to the leadership > training program, then I suggest that NPOC leadership take this up with > Glen or At-Large staff. Alternatively (or additionally), just ask your > members to submit applications here: > http://www.formpl.us/form/0B10rrZn6kIB0T0ctVG5DSjd6RVk/ An unrelated > question ? why are you referring to the NCUC as ?the individual users > constituency?? That isn?t what NCUC stands for, nor does the term > accurately represent its nature or membership. I?m guessing you already > know this. :) Thanks. Amr > > On Sep 21, 2015, at 7:46 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > > All, > > Still seeking clarity on process here. Does this mean that there are no "slots" for NCSG nor for NPOC, and that somehow the individual users constituency (NCUC) has a preferred entitlement here, and that maybe that entitlement extends to a preference over individual applications (which were called for). Having to have learned two sets of principles for governance procedures (Canada, USA) is there a third one with unusual principles that I missed? > > Sam (NPOC Policy Chair) > > On 21/09/2015 2:42 AM, William Drake wrote: > > Hi > > > On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. > > > Indeed the process needs a tweak at ALAC?s end. They told me there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.? So I did an open call and put the Exec. Comm through the exercise of debating and deciding among contending apps, which took time. Then maybe a month or so after notifying them of the resulting selection (Hanane Boujemi of Hivos) I got a note from Gisella and Sandra saying they?d received a direct app from a newish member who?d never said anything on our list etc. and would we support providing a second slot to NCUC. This seemed a bit arbitrary and would have been unfair to the member who went through our process and was turned down, so I said if they want to give NCUC two slots then I should do another open call in fairness to all and their preferred addition could apply and probably get it, since the losing applicant has since decided not to come to Dublin. End of conversation. > > Bill > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lanfran Tue Sep 22 02:01:56 2015 From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:01:56 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> Message-ID: <56008C64.3000908@yorku.ca> Rafik, Thanks. Yes, it is all sorted out. My mix of other duties fogged my mind. I was helping run a major conference at that time. NPOC did have that discussion and it was properly sorted out before the deadline. All is clear in my mind now. Sam On 21/09/2015 5:46 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi Sam, > > NPOC got a slot. Did you check with NPOC leadership about that before ? > NCSG got a slot too, only James approached me about his interest to > apply for it. They may be other but they didn't inform me. > > The deadline passed weeks ago. What we are talking about now is 1 slot > available to GNSO council and ther is suggestion to propose the newly > elected ncsg councillor . > > Best, > From wjdrake Tue Sep 22 08:54:57 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 07:54:57 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> Message-ID: <3487E0E4-3813-48F3-8EAC-0D167BACE67B@gmail.com> > On Sep 21, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > > Amr, > > I stand corrected on my typo w/r to the acronym NCUC [non-commercial,...including individuals]. > > My specific reference to NCUC came from Bill Drake's posting in which he wrote, among other things, that "there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.?", hence my opening comment seeking clarity on process here. I don?t see how you go from that to referring to NCUC as the constituency for individuals, which is the sort of tiresome blatant falsehood we have to keep pushing back on with Westlake. Don?t know where they get this stuff. NCUC has 109 organizational members, and any of their reps could have asked to be considered for the leadership program. Bill > > As for individual members of NCSG who fell that they are qualified, the more that apply the better. I support that and am urging younger members to apply. > > Sam > > On 21/09/2015 2:39 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi Sam, I?m not sure how you reached the conclusion that the NCUC has any entitlement here. Please refer to Rafik?s clarification earlier on this thread. If NPOC hasn?t been asked to provide applicants to the leadership training program, then I suggest that NPOC leadership take this up with Glen or At-Large staff. Alternatively (or additionally), just ask your members to submit applications here: http://www.formpl.us/form/0B10rrZn6kIB0T0ctVG5DSjd6RVk/ An unrelated question ? why are you referring to the NCUC as ?the individual users constituency?? That isn?t what NCUC stands for, nor does the term accurately represent its nature or membership. I?m guessing you already know this. :) Thanks. Amr >>> On Sep 21, 2015, at 7:46 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> Still seeking clarity on process here. Does this mean that there are no "slots" for NCSG nor for NPOC, and that somehow the individual users constituency (NCUC) has a preferred entitlement here, and that maybe that entitlement extends to a preference over individual applications (which were called for). Having to have learned two sets of principles for governance procedures (Canada, USA) is there a third one with unusual principles that I missed? >>> >>> Sam (NPOC Policy Chair) >>> >>> On 21/09/2015 2:42 AM, William Drake wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The process is confusing because we don't appoint people to such slot but they have to apply by themselves. Anyone can do it. >>>>> >>>> Indeed the process needs a tweak at ALAC?s end. They told me there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.? So I did an open call and put the Exec. Comm through the exercise of debating and deciding among contending apps, which took time. Then maybe a month or so after notifying them of the resulting selection (Hanane Boujemi of Hivos) I got a note from Gisella and Sandra saying they?d received a direct app from a newish member who?d never said anything on our list etc. and would we support providing a second slot to NCUC. This seemed a bit arbitrary and would have been unfair to the member who went through our process and was turned down, so I said if they want to give NCUC two slots then I should do another open call in fairness to all and their preferred addition could apply and probably get it, since the losing applicant has since decided not to come to Dublin. End of conversation. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg ********************************************************* William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, ICANN, www.ncuc.org william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), www.williamdrake.org Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q ********************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave Tue Sep 22 09:19:12 2015 From: dave (David Cake) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:19:12 +0800 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <55FEB2C0.6060707@acm.org> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FEB1C9.4070303@acm.org> <55FEB2C0.6060707@acm.org> Message-ID: <6CDC1BF3-D2F3-4AA7-99DD-6BCD886CF5FD@difference.com.au> > On 20 Sep 2015, at 9:21 pm, Avri Doria wrote: > > hi, > > or is my confusion that this is the several day cross ACSO training and > not the days traingsharing of the council. Yes, this is the several days training pre-meeting, not the single day oouncil induction day. David > > Tapani did that the same year I did, its first year. > If so Stefania would be a good candidate for the course. > if she could stand it. > > btw, have all of our council members elect been added to this list? > probably should be. > though i expect this is presumptuous and it has already been take care > of by leadership. > > avri > > On 20-Sep-15 09:16, Avri Doria wrote: >> Aren't the incoming council members already included? >> I thought this was an extra slot. >> >> avri >> >> >> On 20-Sep-15 07:42, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Can we get Stefania to participate in this (if she is willing)? She's >>> going to be new on Council and may benefit from it. >>> >>> Also, is she subscribed to this list yet? She should be, no? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Amr >>> >>> Sent from mobile >>> >>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:27 AM, William Drake >> > wrote: >>> >>>> NCUC did an open call for applications and selected Hanane Boujemi, >>>> one of our many representations of the much heralded Large >>>> organizations. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 5:21 AM, David Cake >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Anyone we should put up for this? >>>>> Have we already put someone up via SG and/or C mechanisms? >>>>> Sending Tapani to this would be one obvious possibility? >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>>> >>>>>> *From: *Marika Konings >>>>> > >>>>>> *Subject: **Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation >>>>>> - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015* >>>>>> *Date: *19 September 2015 8:47:11 pm AWST >>>>>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org " >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> *Reminder* ? candidate names should be submitted as soon as >>>>>> possible to the Council mailing list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Marika >>>>>> >>>>>> From: >>>>> > on behalf of Marika Konings >>>>>> > >>>>>> Date: Wednesday 16 September 2015 09:07 >>>>>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org " >>>>>> > >>>>>> Subject: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN >>>>>> Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear All, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please find below a message in relation to the ICANN Leadership >>>>>> Training Programme. In addition to the candidates that are selected >>>>>> by the GNSO Stakeholder Groups, the Council is also able to select >>>>>> one representative. Note that 'the programme is designed for >>>>>> current and incoming leaders, helping them to better understand the >>>>>> complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills?. _*If >>>>>> you or a member of your SG/C is interested in being considered for >>>>>> this slot, please submit your/their expression of interest to the >>>>>> Council mailing list as soon as possible*_. The official deadline >>>>>> for nominations has already passed, but the organisers of the >>>>>> Leadership Training Programme are aware that many of the leadership >>>>>> positions in the GNSO are still in the process of being filled. If >>>>>> more than one expression of interest is received, the Council may >>>>>> need to consider the process for selecting its representative for >>>>>> this training programme. For further information, please see below >>>>>> and attached. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Marika >>>>>> >>>>>> *From: *At-Large Staff >>>>> > >>>>>> *Date: *Thursday, 23 July 2015 23:48 >>>>>> *To: *Jonathan Robinson >>>>> > >>>>>> *Cc: *Glen De Saint Gery >, >>>>>> sandra hoferichter >>>>> >, At-Large Staff >>>>>> > >>>>>> *Subject: *Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme >>>>>> (LTP) 2015 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Jonathan, >>>>>> >>>>>> With this email, we follow up on the presentation in Buenos Aires >>>>>> about the 2015 Leadership Training Programme scheduled to take >>>>>> place in Dublin, 14 through 16 October, one week prior to the >>>>>> ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> For this programme, *ONE* seat is reserved for a representative >>>>>> from your stakeholder group. The programme is designed for >>>>>> current /_and_/ incoming leaders, helping them to better understand >>>>>> the complexity of ICANN and elaborate their facilitation skills. We >>>>>> are aware that understanding ICANN as an organisation, the topics >>>>>> discussed within ICANN and interaction within the other stakeholder >>>>>> groups is challenging for incoming leaders, but sometimes also for >>>>>> experienced leaders. ICANN and the community are undertaking >>>>>> considerable effort in order to help incoming leaders have a good >>>>>> start in their term and provide current leaders the opportunity to >>>>>> strengthen their leadership and facilitation skills. >>>>>> Participants will have the chance to: >>>>>> >>>>>> ? meet leaders from the other AC/SOs, >>>>>> >>>>>> ? discuss ICANN hot policy topics in an in-depth manner, >>>>>> >>>>>> ? deepen the understanding of key ICANN processes >>>>>> >>>>>> ? develop facilitation and leadership skills, focused >>>>>> personal effectiveness to run meetings and foster processes >>>>>> >>>>>> ? facilitate a session on a topic of their expertise and in >>>>>> accordance to the curriculum (experienced leaders only) >>>>>> >>>>>> The preliminary programme is attached . >>>>>> >>>>>> Accommodation for participants will be covered and participants >>>>>> will receive a stipend. Please note that flights will NOT be >>>>>> covered under this programme as incoming leaders are normally >>>>>> covered by the regular ICANN travel support. Please ensure that the >>>>>> leaders you select are being covered by ICANN Travel Support for >>>>>> their flights to Dublin for the ICANN 54 Meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> *We would like to ask you to identify an** **incoming or current >>>>>> leader from your stakeholder group, which are interested and >>>>>> available to participate in this pro**gramme and ask them to >>>>>> register >>>>>> at: **https://community.icann.org/display/LTP/Leadership+Training+Program+Home **by >>>>>> Monday, 31 August.* >>>>>> >>>>>> We hope this pilot programme will meet the needs of your community. >>>>>> It is an offer for incoming leaders to get on board easier and >>>>>> should provide current leaders the opportunity to enhance their >>>>>> knowledge of ICANN policies and hone their facilitation and >>>>>> leadership skills. All participants will be encouraged to partake >>>>>> in an open exchange of their views as this will facilitate >>>>>> cross-constituency collaboration later during their terms. >>>>>> We are very happy to answer any questions you may have on this >>>>>> exciting Leadership Training Programme and look forward to having >>>>>> your group?s participants confirmed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>> Sandra Hoferichter, Chair of the ICANN Academy WG >>>>>> Heidi Ullrich, Director for At-Large, Staff support for the LTP >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>>> ********************************************************* >>>> William J. Drake >>>> International Fellow & Lecturer >>>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ >>>> University of Zurich, Switzerland >>>> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, >>>> ICANN, www.ncuc.org >>>> william.drake at uzh.ch >>>> (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com >>>> (lists), >>>> www.williamdrake.org >>>> /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q >>>> ********************************************************* >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> 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 >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From lanfran Tue Sep 22 15:09:37 2015 From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:09:37 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <3487E0E4-3813-48F3-8EAC-0D167BACE67B@gmail.com> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> <3487E0E4-3813-48F3-8EAC-0D167BACE67B@gmail.com> Message-ID: <56014501.4080205@yorku.ca> Bill, "Including" is English for inclusion and not exclusivity. It is the only constituency were non-commercial individual users can join. Nobody is suggesting that they be required to only belong to NCSG. Sam On 2015-09-22 1:54 AM, William Drake wrote: >> On Sep 21, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Sam Lanfranco > > wrote: >> Amr, >> I stand corrected on my typo w/r to the acronym NCUC >> [non-commercial,...including individuals]. >> My specific reference to NCUC came from Bill Drake's posting in which >> he wrote, among other things, that "there was one slot for a ?NCUC >> representative.?", hence my opening comment seeking clarity on >> process here. > I don?t see how you go from that to referring to NCUC as the > constituency for individuals, which is the sort of tiresome blatant > falsehood we have to keep pushing back on with Westlake. Don?t know > where they get this stuff. NCUC has 109 organizational members, and > any of their reps could have asked to be considered for the leadership > program. > > Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wjdrake Tue Sep 22 15:12:19 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:12:19 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: <56014501.4080205@yorku.ca> References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> <3487E0E4-3813-48F3-8EAC-0D167BACE67B@gmail.com> <56014501.4080205@yorku.ca> Message-ID: Sam I referred to this: On Sep 21, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: >> somehow the individual users constituency (NCUC) has a preferred entitlement C?est tout. Onward and upward, Bill > On Sep 22, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Sam Lanfranco wrote: > > Bill, > > "Including" is English for inclusion and not exclusivity. > It is the only constituency were non-commercial individual users can join. > Nobody is suggesting that they be required to only belong to NCSG. > > Sam > > On 2015-09-22 1:54 AM, William Drake wrote: >>> On Sep 21, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Sam Lanfranco < Lanfran at yorku.ca > wrote: >>> Amr, >>> I stand corrected on my typo w/r to the acronym NCUC [non-commercial,...including individuals]. >>> My specific reference to NCUC came from Bill Drake's posting in which he wrote, among other things, that "there was one slot for a ?NCUC representative.?", hence my opening comment seeking clarity on process here. >> I don?t see how you go from that to referring to NCUC as the constituency for individuals, which is the sort of tiresome blatant falsehood we have to keep pushing back on with Westlake. Don?t know where they get this stuff. NCUC has 109 organizational members, and any of their reps could have asked to be considered for the leadership program. >> >> Bill > ********************************************************* William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, ICANN, www.ncuc.org william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists), www.williamdrake.org Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q ********************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lanfran Tue Sep 22 15:35:18 2015 From: lanfran (Sam Lanfranco) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:35:18 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015 In-Reply-To: References: <5513C756-DD2F-4703-A260-E2CC0B63DDAE@difference.com.au> <55FF1A75.4090602@mail.utoronto.ca> <20150920205527.GB2602@tarvainen.info> <56004281.5080201@yorku.ca> <4A48C9B6-7836-4E85-8534-835703F65ECF@egyptig.org> <56005308.1000604@yorku.ca> <3487E0E4-3813-48F3-8EAC-0D167BACE67B@gmail.com> <56014501.4080205@yorku.ca> Message-ID: <56014B06.70209@yorku.ca> Bill Agreed Hopefully the air is cleared on any miss understandings here. Everyone has more than enough to do. Sam On 2015-09-22 8:12 AM, William Drake wrote: > C?est tout. From rafik.dammak Thu Sep 24 09:19:00 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:19:00 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination Message-ID: Hi everyone, we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination is the 25th. looking for your feedback and comments. Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mariliamaciel Thu Sep 24 14:16:10 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:16:10 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rafik, I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. Thanks Mar?lia Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" escreveu: > Hi everyone, > > we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her better and > to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. > > we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination is the > 25th. > > looking for your feedback and comments. > > Best, > > Rafik > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Thu Sep 24 15:32:00 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:32:00 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> +1 On 24-Sep-15 07:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there > is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. > Thanks > Mar?lia > > Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" > escreveu: > > Hi everyone, > > we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her > better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. > > we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination > is the 25th. > > looking for your feedback and comments. > > Best, > > Rafik > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From mshears Thu Sep 24 15:32:29 2015 From: mshears (Matthew Shears) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 13:32:29 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5603ED5D.8090307@cdt.org> Who are the other candidates? On 24/09/2015 12:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there > is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. > Thanks > Mar?lia > > Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" > escreveu: > > Hi everyone, > > we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her > better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. > > we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination > is the 25th. > > looking for your feedback and comments. > > Best, > > Rafik > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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 -- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org + 44 771 247 2987 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Thu Sep 24 15:33:34 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 21:33:34 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <5603ED5D.8090307@cdt.org> References: <5603ED5D.8090307@cdt.org> Message-ID: from NCPH, there is only Heather as candidate Rafik 2015-09-24 21:32 GMT+09:00 Matthew Shears : > Who are the other candidates? > > > On 24/09/2015 12:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: > > Hi Rafik, > I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there is > not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. > Thanks > Mar?lia > Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" < > rafik.dammak at gmail.com> escreveu: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her better >> and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. >> >> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination is the >> 25th. >> >> looking for your feedback and comments. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing listPC-NCSG at ipjustice.orghttp://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > -- > > Matthew Shears > Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org+ 44 771 247 2987 > > > > ------------------------------ > [image: Avast logo] > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egmorris1 Thu Sep 24 15:55:59 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 13:55:59 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED5D.8090307@cdt.org> Message-ID: <5A876753-52CA-4DB1-8779-7F59B1ECB5C9@toast.net> Do we have any word about what the CPH decided at their meeting yesterday? Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 24, 2015, at 1:38 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > from NCPH, there is only Heather as candidate > > Rafik > > 2015-09-24 21:32 GMT+09:00 Matthew Shears : >> Who are the other candidates? >> >> >>> On 24/09/2015 12:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: >>> Hi Rafik, >>> I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. >>> Thanks >>> Mar?lia >>> >>> Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" escreveu: >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. >>>> >>>> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination is the 25th. >>>> >>>> looking for your feedback and comments. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> 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 >> >> -- >> >> Matthew Shears >> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights >> Center for Democracy & Technology >> mshears at cdt.org >> + 44 771 247 2987 >> >> >> >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> www.avast.com >> > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Thu Sep 24 16:22:00 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 22:22:00 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <5A876753-52CA-4DB1-8779-7F59B1ECB5C9@toast.net> References: <5603ED5D.8090307@cdt.org> <5A876753-52CA-4DB1-8779-7F59B1ECB5C9@toast.net> Message-ID: no idea about that. Rafik 2015-09-24 21:55 GMT+09:00 Edward Morris : > Do we have any word about what the CPH decided at their meeting yesterday? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 1:38 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > from NCPH, there is only Heather as candidate > > Rafik > > 2015-09-24 21:32 GMT+09:00 Matthew Shears : > >> Who are the other candidates? >> >> >> On 24/09/2015 12:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: >> >> Hi Rafik, >> I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there is >> not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. >> Thanks >> Mar?lia >> Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" < >> rafik.dammak at gmail.com> escreveu: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her better >>> and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. >>> >>> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination is >>> the 25th. >>> >>> looking for your feedback and comments. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing listPC-NCSG at ipjustice.orghttp://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> >> -- >> >> Matthew Shears >> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights >> Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org+ 44 771 247 2987 >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> [image: Avast logo] >> >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> www.avast.com >> >> > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Thu Sep 24 16:56:30 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:56:30 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi, I guess I?m not as confident as Marilia and Avri are on a decision to endorse Heather?s nomination. On one hand, Heather did make it very clear that should she be elected as the next council chair, she would perform her duties neutrally irrespective of the views of the IPC or any other group in the GNSO. I certainly believe her to be making this promise sincerely. It was also interesting to hear from her on her perceived differences from her colleagues in the IPC (her being an academic, and not a lawyer who represents clients' brand interests in the GNSO). On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf of the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the time comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe this should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. We really should be talking to the contracted parties folks, and trying to figure out what their views on Heather are, as well as their own candidate. If there is someone in dialogue with the CPH, please let us know. If not, we should reach out to them ASAP. Thanks. Amr > On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > +1 > > On 24-Sep-15 07:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: >> >> Hi Rafik, >> I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there >> is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. >> Thanks >> Mar?lia >> >> Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" > > escreveu: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her >> better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. >> >> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination >> is the 25th. >> >> looking for your feedback and comments. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From stephanie.perrin Thu Sep 24 17:19:46 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:19:46 +0000 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: <20150924141945.8061072.42624.6656@mail.utoronto.ca> We talked to them informally the other day. I am deeply concerned about having an IPC person in the chair during the who2 work. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Amr Elsadr Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:42 AM To: pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination Hi, I guess I?m not as confident as Marilia and Avri are on a decision to endorse Heather?s nomination. On one hand, Heather did make it very clear that should she be elected as the next council chair, she would perform her duties neutrally irrespective of the views of the IPC or any other group in the GNSO. I certainly believe her to be making this promise sincerely. It was also interesting to hear from her on her perceived differences from her colleagues in the IPC (her being an academic, and not a lawyer who represents clients' brand interests in the GNSO). On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf of the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the time comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe this should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. We really should be talking to the contracted parties folks, and trying to figure out what their views on Heather are, as well as their own candidate. If there is someone in dialogue with the CPH, please let us know. If not, we should reach out to them ASAP. Thanks. Amr > On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > +1 > > On 24-Sep-15 07:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: >> >> Hi Rafik, >> I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there >> is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. >> Thanks >> Mar?lia >> >> Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" > > escreveu: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her >> better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. >> >> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination >> is the 25th. >> >> looking for your feedback and comments. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > 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: From mariliamaciel Thu Sep 24 17:22:26 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:22:26 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi, On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > > On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues > raised during the call, Neither do I, but I guess we would not agree with Jonathan Robinson's views on all issues, or even to each other's views inside the NCSG. What exactly your key concern was, Amr? > and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council > while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new > gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. > Fair enough. Although this seems contradictory to me, if you believe, like you said, she would keep her word about neutrality. > > Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf of > the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the time > comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe this > should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. > An endorsement from the NCSG does not mean we are bound to vote for her, in my understanding. And we made clear to her in the call that we do not have a directed vote. Endorsing means, in my opinion, that we are in favour that the NCPH puts forward a name and that we agree she is a good name considering the whole composition of our house. Of course, we all need to compare this name with a name coming from the CPH if one is appointed. Having said that, I completely agree with you. In order to avoid making relations sour, that should be clearly spelled out to the CSG. > > We really should be talking to the contracted parties folks, and trying to > figure out what their views on Heather are, as well as their own candidate. > If there is someone in dialogue with the CPH, please let us know. If not, > we should reach out to them ASAP. > > Agreed. Please, let's try to find this out. Mar?lia > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On 24-Sep-15 07:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: > >> > >> Hi Rafik, > >> I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there > >> is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. > >> Thanks > >> Mar?lia > >> > >> Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" >> > escreveu: > >> > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her > >> better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. > >> > >> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination > >> is the 25th. > >> > >> looking for your feedback and comments. > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Rafik > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> 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 > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > 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 > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Thu Sep 24 18:24:54 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:24:54 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi Marilia, Responses in-line below: > On Sep 24, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote: > > Hi, > >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> >> On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, > > Neither do I, but I guess we would not agree with Jonathan Robinson's views on all issues, or even to each other's views inside the NCSG. What exactly your key concern was, Amr? One of the substantive issues I disagree with her on is her view on constituency representation on council vs. SG representation. Although this should not impact her management of the dialogue on council (if/when that becomes necessary), I would prefer a chair who was sympathetic to NCSG interests in how council representation and management should be conducted. The time may come when the council chair may be required to interface with the board organisational effectiveness committee (OEC ? previously known as SIC) on this issue on behalf of the council. I?m guessing a chair who is either from the NCSG or the CPH may do this in a manner more to our liking than someone from the IPC. The other issue I had was her concern with the direction the GAC/GNSO CG?s work is headed. This is something I?ve heard voiced in passing a number of times by CSG councillors, but no real rationale was offered, so I?m not sure what the problem is. The way I see it, this group?s work is constructive (or is trying to be anyway). If the objectives of the group are realised, then GAC early engagement in the GNSO?s PDP provides the GNSO with the opportunity to understand and engage with the GAC on their concerns regarding gTLD policy, and address them (one way or another) prior to GAC Advice being issued to the board. I didn?t agree with Jonathan in all things over the past two years, but generally don?t think he was a bad chair at all. He was always fair in chairing all discussions, as well as how he represented council positions when he needed to. Still?, I?m hoping our next chair will be a little more aggressive in repping the GNSO with the board and the GAC. >> and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. >> > Fair enough. Although this seems contradictory to me, if you believe, like you said, she would keep her word about neutrality. Yes?, I believe it is her intent to remain neutral. If she is ultimately elected, we will have to see how well she will be able to deliver on that promise when confronted with the special interests of the group she belongs to. So her promising neutrality, and actually being able to pull it off may be two different things. We need to acknowledge that this will always be a possibility. Thanks. Amr >> Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf of the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the time comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe this should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. >> > An endorsement from the NCSG does not mean we are bound to vote for her, in my understanding. And we made clear to her in the call that we do not have a directed vote. Endorsing means, in my opinion, that we are in favour that the NCPH puts forward a name and that we agree she is a good name considering the whole composition of our house. Of course, we all need to compare this name with a name coming from the CPH if one is appointed. Having said that, I completely agree with you. In order to avoid making relations sour, that should be clearly spelled out to the CSG. > > >> We really should be talking to the contracted parties folks, and trying to figure out what their views on Heather are, as well as their own candidate. If there is someone in dialogue with the CPH, please let us know. If not, we should reach out to them ASAP. >> > Agreed. Please, let's try to find this out. > > Mar?lia > > Thanks. > > Amr > > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On 24-Sep-15 07:16, Marilia Maciel wrote: > >> > >> Hi Rafik, > >> I am positive about the conversation with Heather yesterday, and there > >> is not an ncsg candidate. I would be in favor of this nomination. > >> Thanks > >> Mar?lia > >> > >> Em 24/09/2015 03:19, "Rafik Dammak" >> > escreveu: > >> > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her > >> better and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. > >> > >> we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination > >> is the 25th. > >> > >> looking for your feedback and comments. > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Rafik > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PC-NCSG mailing list > >> 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 > > > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > 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 > > > > -- > Mar?lia Maciel > Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio > Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School > http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts > > DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu > PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ > Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en From avri Thu Sep 24 18:14:43 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:14:43 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: <56041363.7000502@acm.org> On 24-Sep-15 09:56, Amr Elsadr wrote: > On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. I can't say I agreed with all her views either. Then again I am not sure I agree with the views of anyone on all the issues. Often, I am not even sure I agree with my own views on everything all the time - that is often the effect of listening to other people and the passage of time. I think that if she is nominated and wins, her desire to maintain her academic integrity and reputation will insure she listens when anyone explains to her that she is leaning one way or another. I think she is a listener - and that is a rare capability in the GNSO council. I think it is a capability we need to consider in any candidate. But yes, while we can go on experience of a person, any election requires some act of faith. I have never voted for anyone who ended up 100% predictable. Speaking from experience, the council chair job does change people. > Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf of the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the time comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe this should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. I do think that everyone knows that being nominated by a house does not guarantee the votes of that house when the chair election is held in Dublin. I also hope that our GNSO Council leadership is planing a interview of both candidates during the GNSO weekend in Dublin. But yes, when it comes time for the new council to vote, everyone will have to make up their own mind. > > We really should be talking to the contracted parties folks, and trying to figure out what their views on Heather are, as well as their own candidate. If there is someone in dialogue with the CPH, please let us know. If not, we should reach out to them ASAP. If it is like previous years, there will be lots of conversation about the candidates in Dublin. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From avri Thu Sep 24 18:24:45 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:24:45 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: <560415BD.2010508@acm.org> On 24-Sep-15 11:24, Amr Elsadr wrote: > I?m hoping our next chair will be a little more aggressive in repping the GNSO with the board and the GAC. That may always be a liabilty with a contracted party person who works for someone whose employer and SG is dependent on Board largess. Some people and groups can afford to piss off the board more than others. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From aelsadr Thu Sep 24 18:45:50 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:45:50 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56041363.7000502@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: <9175A23A-779B-4B8B-ADB4-B2904A3FB440@egyptig.org> Hi, > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:14 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 24-Sep-15 09:56, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. > > I can't say I agreed with all her views either. Then again I am not > sure I agree with the views of anyone on all the issues. Often, I am not > even sure I agree with my own views on everything all the time - that is > often the effect of listening to other people and the passage of time. > > I think that if she is nominated and wins, her desire to maintain her > academic integrity and reputation will insure she listens when anyone > explains to her that she is leaning one way or another. I think she is a > listener - and that is a rare capability in the GNSO council. I think it > is a capability we need to consider in any candidate. > > But yes, while we can go on experience of a person, any election > requires some act of faith. I have never voted for anyone who ended up > 100% predictable. Speaking from experience, the council chair job does > change people. Those are all fair points. Thanks. Amr From mariliamaciel Thu Sep 24 18:32:17 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 12:32:17 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56041363.7000502@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow (the initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put forward a name. Is that our strategy? Thanks M On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > On 24-Sep-15 09:56, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all > issues raised during the call, and still have concerns with a member of the > IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a > subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. > > I can't say I agreed with all her views either. Then again I am not > sure I agree with the views of anyone on all the issues. Often, I am not > even sure I agree with my own views on everything all the time - that is > often the effect of listening to other people and the passage of time. > > I think that if she is nominated and wins, her desire to maintain her > academic integrity and reputation will insure she listens when anyone > explains to her that she is leaning one way or another. I think she is a > listener - and that is a rare capability in the GNSO council. I think it > is a capability we need to consider in any candidate. > > But yes, while we can go on experience of a person, any election > requires some act of faith. I have never voted for anyone who ended up > 100% predictable. Speaking from experience, the council chair job does > change people. > > > Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf > of the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the > time comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe > this should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. > > I do think that everyone knows that being nominated by a house does not > guarantee the votes of that house when the chair election is held in > Dublin. > > I also hope that our GNSO Council leadership is planing a interview of > both candidates during the GNSO weekend in Dublin. > > But yes, when it comes time for the new council to vote, everyone will > have to make up their own mind. > > > > > We really should be talking to the contracted parties folks, and trying > to figure out what their views on Heather are, as well as their own > candidate. If there is someone in dialogue with the CPH, please let us > know. If not, we should reach out to them ASAP. > > If it is like previous years, there will be lots of conversation about > the candidates in Dublin. > > avri > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wjdrake Thu Sep 24 18:36:15 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:36:15 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:24 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > One of the substantive issues I disagree with her on is her view on constituency representation on council vs. SG representation. Although this should not impact her management of the dialogue on council (if/when that becomes necessary), I would prefer a chair who was sympathetic to NCSG interests in how council representation and management should be conducted. Irrespective of where one stands on this issue, clearly the chair should be able to fully understand and reflect the diverse concerns of the parties, and fully cognizant of the range of consequences associated with each model. I find it hard to imagine someone from IPC, which is the arguably the most floral exemplar of silo syndrome, will be as well positioned to do that as e.g. someone from Rgy. Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin Thu Sep 24 18:34:00 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:34:00 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <560417E8.8010107@mail.utoronto.ca> 1. If running her as a candidate means the contracted parties are not going to run a candidate, I would not support her. 2. I dont want an IPC candidate in the chair during WHO2. Procedural shenanigans going on in PPSAI, plenty of scope for that in the WHO2 timeframe, that will kill us. 3. Other than that, she is smart and v capable. However, IPC follow orders. AS to her being an academic not a practitioner....she is a brand new Doc. She will be doing consulting for sure, most do (except us unemployable privacy advocates) 4. If I have choices, I wont vote for her. However I do not want to waste James Bladel in the Chair postion, he is the most authoritative voice among the registrars on all things WHOIS. cheers STephanie On 2015-09-24 2:19, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi everyone, > > we had yesterday the confcall with Heather in order to know her better > and to see if we can support her as candidate from NCPH. > > we have to make decision quickly since the deadline for nomination is > the 25th. > > looking for your feedback and comments. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Thu Sep 24 18:52:03 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:52:03 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi, > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote: > > Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. > > Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? No?, I don?t think you got it wrong?, and I pretty much agree with you. Have just been thinking out loud so that my personal thoughts and concerns are on the record. > A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow (the initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put forward a name. Is that our strategy? Not mine. :) If we manage before the deadline, all the better. I also suspect the CPH will put forward a name regardless of what we do on our side of the GNSO. Thanks. Amr From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 25 05:55:33 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 11:55:33 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi everyone, checking with Keith, CPH is going to nominate James Bladel. as mentioned several times, voting is not coupled with nomination process. We can go with nominating Heather since we are not proposing any alternative (we had the opportunity to do so) and we will decide for the votes later, more carefully. there will opportunities to discuss with candidates and personally I think we have to weight all options. for the nomination deadline extension , I don't think that is needed with the current status. I don't know what was the reaction in GNSO council and what was decided. looking to hear from you so I can send the response to Steve M and do the nomination before the deadline. best, Rafik 2015-09-25 0:52 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > Hi, > > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marilia Maciel > wrote: > > > > Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. > > > > Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the > nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would > consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying > that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? > > No?, I don?t think you got it wrong?, and I pretty much agree with you. > Have just been thinking out loud so that my personal thoughts and concerns > are on the record. > > > A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow (the > initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put forward a > name. Is that our strategy? > > Not mine. :) If we manage before the deadline, all the better. I also > suspect the CPH will put forward a name regardless of what we do on our > side of the GNSO. > > Thanks. > > Amr > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egmorris1 Fri Sep 25 07:33:26 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 05:33:26 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, Thanks for all of your hard work on this. I think it is in the best interest of the NCSG for there to be a campaign. We can use this as an opportunity to educate the candidates of our concerns, and hopefully extract some promises of support for the things we most care about in exchange for things the candidates most care about: winning the election. :) I think Heather and James are both decent people and fine candidates. Barring something shocking I do know in the end who I will be supporting but let's play this one out. It's always better to have an election than it is to have a coronation. Thanks again, Rafik, for sorting all of this out for us. Best, Ed Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 25, 2015, at 4:48 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > checking with Keith, CPH is going to nominate James Bladel. > as mentioned several times, voting is not coupled with nomination process. We can go with nominating Heather since we are not proposing any alternative (we had the opportunity to do so) and we will decide for the votes later, more carefully. there will opportunities to discuss with candidates and personally I think we have to weight all options. > > for the nomination deadline extension , I don't think that is needed with the current status. I don't know what was the reaction in GNSO council and what was decided. > > looking to hear from you so I can send the response to Steve M and do the nomination before the deadline. > > best, > > Rafik > > 2015-09-25 0:52 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >> Hi, >> >> > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote: >> > >> > Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. >> > >> > Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? >> >> No?, I don?t think you got it wrong?, and I pretty much agree with you. Have just been thinking out loud so that my personal thoughts and concerns are on the record. >> >> > A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow (the initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put forward a name. Is that our strategy? >> >> Not mine. :) If we manage before the deadline, all the better. I also suspect the CPH will put forward a name regardless of what we do on our side of the GNSO. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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: From dave Fri Sep 25 09:18:11 2015 From: dave (David Cake) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 14:18:11 +0800 Subject: [PC-NCSG] GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we all have time for In-Reply-To: <55FC0981.1020100@acm.org> References: <55F82B7F.5090509@acm.org> <5B5048AD-C0F8-4371-AB7D-34DBC8ABE988@toast.net> <55FC0981.1020100@acm.org> Message-ID: <8E5E9D2C-DABC-4A2D-82F4-91A2410B37B1@difference.com.au> Yes, I think that is the plan. Presumably I will chair the council for the Chair vote, which is probably the only major item of business for the new council, which is done as a live council vote, then hand over immediately to the new chair. The vice-chair process is entirely separate, and is not done ?live? - if a vote is necessary, its done via email. David > On 18 Sep 2015, at 8:54 pm, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > I expect the chair vote will actually be done in the first meeting of > the new council in Dublin. > > The issue with not deciding on the v-chair until after we know about > this election is that you cannot nominate for v-chair until after the > election. you need a v-chair to run the election. > > but you will have at least one continuing v-chair from 2015, David, so > he can run the election. then the ncph v-chair process can be done post > Dublin before the first post Dublin council meeting. > > avri > > On 18-Sep-15 08:40, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> The confcall is open to all membership. >> We are deciding for nomination only. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> On Sep 18, 2015 9:37 PM, "Edward Morris" > > wrote: >> >> Hi Rafik, >> >> Thanks for that. >> >> I just wanted to confirm we're only deciding Chair nomination and >> not Chair vote. In other words, any support for Heather or >> any other NCPH candidate now,does not necessarily oblige any of us >> to support the NCPH candidate in the final election. Obviously >> until we definitely know who, if anyone, the CPH is putting >> forward I wouldn't want to do that. >> >> Also, although she won't be involved in the nomination should we >> invite Stefania to be part of the call son she can get to know >> Heather a bit better in case she is nominated? >> >> Thanks again for tolerating my relative ignorance as, as Stephanie >> might say :), a newbie to the process. >> >> Ed >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > > >> *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:23 PM >> *To*: "Edward Morris" > > >> *Cc*: "NCSG-Policy" > > >> *Subject*: re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: >> FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we >> all have time for >> >> >> Hi Ed, >> >> We have to decide first who to nominate for chair election from >> NCPH. The deadline for ncph is 25th september. That process and >> timeline are already outlined by GNSO council. After that we will >> do election the vice chair at ncph level. >> Procedure for vice-chair was already agreed for this year. >> >> Rafik >> >> On Sep 18, 2015 9:17 PM, "Edward Morris" > > wrote: >> >> Hi Rafik, >> >> Thanks for doing all of this. >> >> Could you clarify for me, and perhaps the others who are going >> through this for the first time, what exactly we're deciding? >> There are obviously many things going on here (Chair, VC, >> nomination, election, procedures) which overlap two different >> Councils and for which all moving parts are not yet in place. >> >> Sorry for being a bit slow on the uptake. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ed >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From*: "Rafik Dammak" > > >> *Sent*: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:33 PM >> *To*: "NCSG-Policy" > > >> *Subject*: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: >> FW: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what >> we all have time for >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> response from steve to David suggestion. >> the call with Heather will be held in Wednesday. how shall we >> make decision after that? an ad-hoc call or just via the >> mailing list? >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: *Metalitz, Steven* > >> Date: 2015-09-17 22:25 GMT+09:00 >> Subject: RE: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: >> [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we >> all have time for >> To: Edward Morris > >, "avri at acm.org >> " > >> Cc: David Cake > >, Amr Elsadr >> >, Rafik >> Dammak > >, Stephanie Perrin >> > >, Marilia Maciel >> >, >> Heather Forrest > >, "David Fares >> (dfares at 21cf.com )" > >, "Greg Shatan >> (gregshatanipc at gmail.com )" >> >, >> "Metalitz, Steven" >, "Philip >> Corwin (psc at vlaw-dc.com )" >> >, Tony Harris >> >, "Tony >> Holmes (tonyarholmes at btinternet.com >> )" >> > >> >> >> >> NCSG colleagues, >> >> >> >> I have consulted with CSG Executive Committee (copied in here) >> and there is no objection to the position that if a CSG person >> (e.g., Heather) is elected council chair, then the council >> vice chair for our House should not come from CSG. >> >> >> >> I understand you are working to set up a call with Heather to >> discuss her council chair candidacy. If that goes well, >> please let me know so that we can work out the specifics of >> making a joint nomination by the Sept. 25 deadline. >> >> >> >> If Heather is ultimately elected then we can proceed to the >> vice chair selection process, using the modified version of >> Avri?s proposal, with the expectation that no one from CSG >> would be nominated. >> >> >> >> Steve Metalitz >> >> >> >> *From:*Edward Morris [mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net >> ] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:39 AM >> *To:* avri at acm.org >> *Cc:* David Cake; Amr Elsadr; Rafik Dammak; Metalitz, Steven; >> Stephanie Perrin; Marilia Maciel; Heather Forrest >> *Subject:* Re: GNSO council chair elections WAS RE: FW: >> [Gnso-ncph-leadership] NCPH v-chair election - just what we >> all have time for >> >> >> >> I agree as well. It makes things a bit simpler and more >> straightforward. >> >> Ed >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Sep 15, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Avri Doria > > wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> this makes sense to me. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> On 15-Sep-15 10:21, David Cake wrote: >>>>>>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 8:31 pm, Amr Elsadr >> > wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Steve, Rafik and all, >> >> Apologies about my late >> response to >>> this message. >> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Rafik Dammak >>> > >> wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> About your question >>> below, yes I think that is about considering them in tandem >> at least to >>> shorten the process we also assume that there is >> interrelation between >>> selecting a vice-chair and nominating a candidate for chair. >> Amr may >>> add more details here. >> >> This wasn?t originally my >> suggestion, but I >>> did support this being a discussion item. Of course, Steve >> is correct. >>> The chair and vice-chair election/selection processes are very >>> different, and carried out by different groups. However, my >> personal >>> thought on this matter is that it would be desirable to >> avoid having >>> both a council chair and vice-chair from the same >> stakeholder group of >>> the NCPH. > > Yes. > My experience as vice-chair is that while I >>> don?t think its a regular problem, I think there are some >> situations in >>> which it might be a governance issue if 2 of the 3 council >> leadership >>> positions were held by the same SG. I don?t think we need to >> combine the >>> two procedures into a single unified one, a simple rule that >> if we have >>> an NCPH chair, the vice-chair is from the other NCPH SG >> regardless of >>> any rotation rules, would be reasonable. > I actually think this >>> rule might be in NCPH interests - I think the CPH might be >> more likely >>> to vote for an NCPH chair if they know that there will be >> some balance, >>> and the Chair is definitely more important. > Regards > > David >>> >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus >> software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From dave Fri Sep 25 09:29:18 2015 From: dave (David Cake) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 14:29:18 +0800 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56041363.7000502@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: <02BC8869-4CF1-4474-A2B0-DD916AFA9AEE@difference.com.au> > On 24 Sep 2015, at 11:14 pm, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > On 24-Sep-15 09:56, Amr Elsadr wrote: >> On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. > > I can't say I agreed with all her views either. Then again I am not > sure I agree with the views of anyone on all the issues. Often, I am not > even sure I agree with my own views on everything all the time - that is > often the effect of listening to other people and the passage of time. I?m very fond of a quote from David Mamet, on some people he met attending the Soldier of Fortune convention: "I didn't agree with some of the ideas, but then I don't agree with a lot of my own ideas, and seem powerless to rid myself of them? > I think that if she is nominated and wins, her desire to maintain her > academic integrity and reputation will insure she listens when anyone > explains to her that she is leaning one way or another. I think she is a > listener - and that is a rare capability in the GNSO council. I think it > is a capability we need to consider in any candidate. I think she can be relatively trusted to try hard to be impartial. There is also a good chance that some in the IPC will try to pressure her otherwise (I even got grilled by the Kristinator for not being sufficiently biased towards the NCPH), but I think she is well equipped to resist it. >> Having said that, I can?t say I am opposed to nominating her on behalf of the NCPH, but cannot say whether or not I would vote for her when the time comes to elect a new chair. If we do agree to nominate her, I believe this should be communicated clearly to both the CSG and the CPH SGs. > > I do think that everyone knows that being nominated by a house does not > guarantee the votes of that house when the chair election is held in > Dublin. Absolutely. Especially as we do not know who the CPH candidate is. I would assume it likely that we would vote for a registrar candidate, given the excellent working relationship we have had with them over the last couple of years, and I?d assume the CSG are not blind to that. The best chance of getting an NCPH chair has always been that there will be no strong CPH candidate. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From dave Fri Sep 25 09:34:41 2015 From: dave (David Cake) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 14:34:41 +0800 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> > On 25 Sep 2015, at 10:55 am, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > checking with Keith, CPH is going to nominate James Bladel. Well, then, I suggest we agree to Heather as NCPH candidate, and then vote for James. He?s an excellent councillor, will almost certainly do a good job as chair, and has proved to be both fully supportive of many of our big issues and very effective at pushing them. We don?t agree on everything he/GoDaddy thinks, but I think he can be trusted to be impartial. > as mentioned several times, voting is not coupled with nomination process. We can go with nominating Heather since we are not proposing any alternative (we had the opportunity to do so) and we will decide for the votes later, more carefully. there will opportunities to discuss with candidates and personally I think we have to weight all options. We?ve left nominating an NCSG candidate too late, and to be honest I would have argued against it if I had known James was the CPH candidate. I suggest we agree with the nomination of Heather for now. And expect furious lobbying from the CSG to vote for her (which I expect will be pointless - the CPH aren?t going to vote for her if James is their candidate). David -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From dave Fri Sep 25 09:47:14 2015 From: dave (David Cake) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 14:47:14 +0800 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> Message-ID: I apologise for missing the conf call with Heather on Wednesday. I was actually doing a live tv show at the time (only for community TV, but still kept me busy). A few thoughts below > On 24 Sep 2015, at 11:24 pm, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > Hi Marilia, > > Responses in-line below: > >> On Sep 24, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: >>> >>> On the other hand, I can?t say that I agreed with her views on all issues raised during the call, >> >> Neither do I, but I guess we would not agree with Jonathan Robinson's views on all issues, or even to each other's views inside the NCSG. What exactly your key concern was, Amr? > > One of the substantive issues I disagree with her on is her view on constituency representation on council vs. SG representation. Although this should not impact her management of the dialogue on council (if/when that becomes necessary), I would prefer a chair who was sympathetic to NCSG interests in how council representation and management should be conducted. > > The time may come when the council chair may be required to interface with the board organisational effectiveness committee (OEC ? previously known as SIC) on this issue on behalf of the council. I?m guessing a chair who is either from the NCSG or the CPH may do this in a manner more to our liking than someone from the IPC. I agree. Handling of the OEC and response to the review is one of the major issues that makes council leadership important in the next year. The constituency issue is going to be the one that really matters. > The other issue I had was her concern with the direction the GAC/GNSO CG?s work is headed. This is something I?ve heard voiced in passing a number of times by CSG councillors, but no real rationale was offered, so I?m not sure what the problem is. The way I see it, this group?s work is constructive (or is trying to be anyway). If the objectives of the group are realised, then GAC early engagement in the GNSO?s PDP provides the GNSO with the opportunity to understand and engage with the GAC on their concerns regarding gTLD policy, and address them (one way or another) prior to GAC Advice being issued to the board. I agree on this too - the GAC/GNSO CG has been very effective IMO, and I very much would like to see it continue in the direction it is going. I don?t know what CSG concerns are, I?d like to hear them (and perhaps encourage the CSG to put someone on the group when its membership is renewed). > > I didn?t agree with Jonathan in all things over the past two years, but generally don?t think he was a bad chair at all. He was always fair in chairing all discussions, as well as how he represented council positions when he needed to. Still?, I?m hoping our next chair will be a little more aggressive in repping the GNSO with the board and the GAC. > >>> and still have concerns with a member of the IPC chairing the council while it is managing the process for PDPs on a subsequent round of new gTLDs, next gen RDS and a review of the UDRP. >>> >> Fair enough. Although this seems contradictory to me, if you believe, like you said, she would keep her word about neutrality. > > Yes?, I believe it is her intent to remain neutral. If she is ultimately elected, we will have to see how well she will be able to deliver on that promise when confronted with the special interests of the group she belongs to. So her promising neutrality, and actually being able to pull it off may be two different things. We need to acknowledge that this will always be a possibility. I agree. I also think that the significance of council leadership in council decisions is less significant that some think, the GNSO WG processes are fairly locked down and clearly responsible to the council not leadership once they get rolling, AoC reviews are very independent once appointed, etc , so I?m much less concerned than Stephanie with the role of leadership in WHO2, etc. Leadership matters most for cross-AC/SO work, especially where it is new. David -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From wjdrake Fri Sep 25 12:40:42 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 11:40:42 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> Message-ID: > On Sep 25, 2015, at 8:34 AM, David Cake wrote: > > I suggest we agree with the nomination of Heather for now. And expect furious lobbying from the CSG to vote for her (which I expect will be pointless - the CPH aren?t going to vote for her if James is their candidate). Yes and think of the fun of being lobbied by CSG? It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch they pulled with Olga. Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Fri Sep 25 16:09:04 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:09:04 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> Message-ID: <43957091-8CF8-4F31-B817-C01B49253B4B@egyptig.org> Hi, Thanks for this Rafik. I agree on all counts. Lets move forward with nominating Heather, and hopefully get this done today with no extension to the deadline. I had asked for this to be discussed during the council meeting under AoB, but was disconnected so did not have the chance to bring it up. Not sure if somebody else did, or not. It seems it won?t be necessary after all. Thanks again. Amr > On Sep 25, 2015, at 4:55 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > checking with Keith, CPH is going to nominate James Bladel. > as mentioned several times, voting is not coupled with nomination process. We can go with nominating Heather since we are not proposing any alternative (we had the opportunity to do so) and we will decide for the votes later, more carefully. there will opportunities to discuss with candidates and personally I think we have to weight all options. > > for the nomination deadline extension , I don't think that is needed with the current status. I don't know what was the reaction in GNSO council and what was decided. > > looking to hear from you so I can send the response to Steve M and do the nomination before the deadline. > > best, > > Rafik > > 2015-09-25 0:52 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > Hi, > > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote: > > > > Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. > > > > Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? > > No?, I don?t think you got it wrong?, and I pretty much agree with you. Have just been thinking out loud so that my personal thoughts and concerns are on the record. > > > A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow (the initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put forward a name. Is that our strategy? > > Not mine. :) If we manage before the deadline, all the better. I also suspect the CPH will put forward a name regardless of what we do on our side of the GNSO. > > Thanks. > > Amr > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > From mariliamaciel Fri Sep 25 15:56:39 2015 From: mariliamaciel (Marilia Maciel) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 09:56:39 -0300 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <43957091-8CF8-4F31-B817-C01B49253B4B@egyptig.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <43957091-8CF8-4F31-B817-C01B49253B4B@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Agree with the approach, Rafik. M On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for this Rafik. I agree on all counts. Lets move forward with > nominating Heather, and hopefully get this done today with no extension to > the deadline. > > I had asked for this to be discussed during the council meeting under AoB, > but was disconnected so did not have the chance to bring it up. Not sure if > somebody else did, or not. It seems it won?t be necessary after all. > > Thanks again. > > Amr > > > On Sep 25, 2015, at 4:55 AM, Rafik Dammak > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > checking with Keith, CPH is going to nominate James Bladel. > > as mentioned several times, voting is not coupled with nomination > process. We can go with nominating Heather since we are not proposing any > alternative (we had the opportunity to do so) and we will decide for the > votes later, more carefully. there will opportunities to discuss with > candidates and personally I think we have to weight all options. > > > > for the nomination deadline extension , I don't think that is needed > with the current status. I don't know what was the reaction in GNSO council > and what was decided. > > > > looking to hear from you so I can send the response to Steve M and do > the nomination before the deadline. > > > > best, > > > > Rafik > > > > 2015-09-25 0:52 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : > > Hi, > > > > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marilia Maciel > wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. > > > > > > Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the > nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would > consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying > that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? > > > > No?, I don?t think you got it wrong?, and I pretty much agree with you. > Have just been thinking out loud so that my personal thoughts and concerns > are on the record. > > > > > A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow > (the initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put > forward a name. Is that our strategy? > > > > Not mine. :) If we manage before the deadline, all the better. I also > suspect the CPH will put forward a name regardless of what we do on our > side of the GNSO. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Amr > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-NCSG mailing list > > 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 > -- *Mar?lia Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak Fri Sep 25 16:00:44 2015 From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 22:00:44 +0900 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <43957091-8CF8-4F31-B817-C01B49253B4B@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hi, Ok I think I will go with that and inform Steve. Rafik On Sep 25, 2015 9:56 PM, "Marilia Maciel" wrote: > Agree with the approach, Rafik. > M > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for this Rafik. I agree on all counts. Lets move forward with >> nominating Heather, and hopefully get this done today with no extension to >> the deadline. >> >> I had asked for this to be discussed during the council meeting under >> AoB, but was disconnected so did not have the chance to bring it up. Not >> sure if somebody else did, or not. It seems it won?t be necessary after all. >> >> Thanks again. >> >> Amr >> >> > On Sep 25, 2015, at 4:55 AM, Rafik Dammak >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > checking with Keith, CPH is going to nominate James Bladel. >> > as mentioned several times, voting is not coupled with nomination >> process. We can go with nominating Heather since we are not proposing any >> alternative (we had the opportunity to do so) and we will decide for the >> votes later, more carefully. there will opportunities to discuss with >> candidates and personally I think we have to weight all options. >> > >> > for the nomination deadline extension , I don't think that is needed >> with the current status. I don't know what was the reaction in GNSO council >> and what was decided. >> > >> > looking to hear from you so I can send the response to Steve M and do >> the nomination before the deadline. >> > >> > best, >> > >> > Rafik >> > >> > 2015-09-25 0:52 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr : >> > Hi, >> > >> > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marilia Maciel >> wrote: >> > > >> > > Thanks for clarifying your substantive issues, Amr. >> > > >> > > Trying to be pragmatic here, I believe that Rafik asked us about the >> nomination. Although different people have raised reasons why they would >> consider not voting for the candidate, I still did not see someone saying >> that they would be against the nomination. Or did I get it wrong? >> > >> > No?, I don?t think you got it wrong?, and I pretty much agree with you. >> Have just been thinking out loud so that my personal thoughts and concerns >> are on the record. >> > >> > > A request for an extension on making this decision beyond tomorrow >> (the initially agreed deadline) only forces the hand of the CPH to put >> forward a name. Is that our strategy? >> > >> > Not mine. :) If we manage before the deadline, all the better. I also >> suspect the CPH will put forward a name regardless of what we do on our >> side of the GNSO. >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Amr >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PC-NCSG mailing list >> > 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 >> > > > > -- > *Mar?lia Maciel* > Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio > Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law > School > http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts > > DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu > PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ > Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - > http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Fri Sep 25 16:55:28 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 06:55:28 -0700 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> Message-ID: <56055250.4@acm.org> On 25-Sep-15 02:40, William Drake wrote: > > It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch > they pulled with Olga. I hope not to see this. And do not see any context in which it can be called fun. I hope that people really do give serious thought to both the candidates and pick the one that will serve best. And really think about which one will be best able to serve neutrally and give fair treatment to registrants and user issues. Let's not mistreat people. Even if we believe we have have been mistreated in the past. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From egmorris1 Fri Sep 25 18:05:25 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 16:05:25 +0100 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56055250.4@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> Message-ID: <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> I like and respect both of the candidates very much. They've both always been honest with me, courteous and respectful and are amongst my favorite people to work with and talk to on Council. That doesn't mean there are not differences - there are - but I'd suggest we try dealing directly with the candidates themselves rather than with any surrogates. I think we owe that to them and while keeping a watchful eye it would shock me if either James or Heather would allow themselves to be used in a less than ethical way. They both are good people with excellent personal reputations that from my experience are well deserved. Best, Ed Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > >> On 25-Sep-15 02:40, William Drake wrote: >> >> It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch >> they pulled with Olga. > > I hope not to see this. And do not see any context in which it can be > called fun. > > I hope that people really do give serious thought to both the candidates > and pick the one that will serve best. And really think about which one > will be best able to serve neutrally and give fair treatment to > registrants and user issues. > > Let's not mistreat people. Even if we believe we have have been > mistreated in the past. > > avri > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From aelsadr Sat Sep 26 15:24:10 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 14:24:10 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> Message-ID: <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> Hi, I don?t believe anyone has even alluded to doubting the ethics of either candidate. Lets not make this thread about something it isn?t. We?ve (including myself) only been voicing both the pros and cons of nominating Heather along with the CSG, and as expected, had a bit of opinions to share in the aftermath of the call with Heather earlier this week. I would encourage us to keep having this conversation, and continue to express opinions on why either candidate is more or less desirable as a council chair to both the NCSG and the GNSO. In doing this, I agree with Avri. There is no call to mistreat or behave unfairly with anyone ? for any reason. Thanks. Amr > On Sep 25, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Edward Morris wrote: > > I like and respect both of the candidates very much. They've both always been honest with me, courteous and respectful and are amongst my favorite people to work with and talk to on Council. That doesn't mean there are not differences - there are - but I'd suggest we try dealing directly with the candidates themselves rather than with any surrogates. I think we owe that to them and while keeping a watchful eye it would shock me if either James or Heather would allow themselves to be used in a less than ethical way. They both are good people with excellent personal reputations that from my experience are well deserved. > > Best, > > Ed > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 25-Sep-15 02:40, William Drake wrote: >>> >>> It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch >>> they pulled with Olga. >> >> I hope not to see this. And do not see any context in which it can be >> called fun. >> >> I hope that people really do give serious thought to both the candidates >> and pick the one that will serve best. And really think about which one >> will be best able to serve neutrally and give fair treatment to >> registrants and user issues. >> >> Let's not mistreat people. Even if we believe we have have been >> mistreated in the past. >> >> avri >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 From egmorris1 Sat Sep 26 15:50:38 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:50:38 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> ---------------------------------------- From: "Amr Elsadr" Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 1:10 PM To: "Edward Morris" Cc: avri at acm.org, pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination Hi, I don't believe anyone has even alluded to doubting the ethics of either candidate. Lets not make this thread about something it isn't. Maybe not in your ethical code, Amr, but suggesting either candidate would participate in a "bait and switch" scheme to me is an indication of impure motivation, an ethics problem. I responded suggesting neither Heather nor James would participate in such fraud. I'm sorry you have problems with my response. Best, Ed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr Sat Sep 26 16:13:16 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:13:16 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> Message-ID: <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> Hi Ed, Wow!! Way to go making this about my ethical code!! I thought the reference to participation in a "bait and switch" scheme was made in association with us and our strategy in the elections, not the candidates. In case you have any doubts, I am not in favor of such tactics. Apart from being unethical, I believe them to be not constructive. I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. Thanks. Amr Sent from mobile > On Sep 26, 2015, at 2:50 PM, Edward Morris wrote: > > > > From: "Amr Elsadr" > Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 1:10 PM > To: "Edward Morris" > Cc: avri at acm.org, pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org > Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination > > Hi, > > I don?t believe anyone has even alluded to doubting the ethics of either candidate. Lets not make this thread about something it isn?t. > > > > Maybe not in your ethical code, Amr, but suggesting either candidate would participate in a "bait and switch" scheme to me is an indication of impure motivation, an ethics problem. I responded suggesting neither Heather nor James would participate in such fraud. I'm sorry you have problems with my response. > > Best, > > Ed > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From egmorris1 Sat Sep 26 16:22:49 2015 From: egmorris1 (Edward Morris) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 09:22:49 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <60a24e530fcb48f59fe47ca01672fdb1@toast.net> Hi Amr, Thanks for explaining. I thought you were attacking me as being overly pious, but we obviously read and reacted to the initial post in different ways. The idea either Heather or James would allow themselves to be used in that way...well, we both know they wouldn't. It bugged me just as it would if anyone suggested you or I would let ourselves be used in such a way. I actually think we're both saying the same thing: these are two good people, let's treat everyone, as you wrote, fairly. I've heard stories about the past but that is the past. I'd trust either Heather or James with my wallet, possessions: good people both, high integrity both. Sorry if offence was taken and sorry I took offence when none was intended. I will self punish: another 9 or 10 hours on a CCWG call today. Berst, Ed ---------------------------------------- From: "Amr Elsadr" Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 2:10 PM To: "egmorris1 at toast.net" Cc: "" , "" Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination Hi Ed, Wow!! Way to go making this about my ethical code!! I thought the reference to participation in a "bait and switch" scheme was made in association with us and our strategy in the elections, not the candidates. In case you have any doubts, I am not in favor of such tactics. Apart from being unethical, I believe them to be not constructive. I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. Thanks. Amr Sent from mobile On Sep 26, 2015, at 2:50 PM, Edward Morris wrote: ---------------------------------------- From: "Amr Elsadr" Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 1:10 PM To: "Edward Morris" Cc: avri at acm.org, pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org Subject: Re: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination Hi, I don't believe anyone has even alluded to doubting the ethics of either candidate. Lets not make this thread about something it isn't. Maybe not in your ethical code, Amr, but suggesting either candidate would participate in a "bait and switch" scheme to me is an indication of impure motivation, an ethics problem. I responded suggesting neither Heather nor James would participate in such fraud. I'm sorry you have problems with my response. Best, Ed -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wjdrake Sat Sep 26 17:24:07 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 16:24:07 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <6C887F60-676C-4B54-BE2D-42FC005A12E0@gmail.com> > On Sep 26, 2015, at 2:24 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > I don?t believe anyone has even alluded to doubting the ethics of either candidate. Lets not make this thread about something it isn?t. Thank you -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wjdrake Sat Sep 26 17:37:32 2015 From: wjdrake (William Drake) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 16:37:32 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> Message-ID: > On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > > I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. You are not. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avri Sat Sep 26 21:36:45 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:36:45 -0700 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <5606E5BD.5010107@acm.org> Hi, If it was in jest, it was ill placed on a public list and others may have had the same confusion I had in seeing it as a suggestion to be considered. avri On 26-Sep-15 07:37, William Drake wrote: > >> On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Amr Elsadr > > wrote: >> >> I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. > > You are not. > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From stephanie.perrin Sun Sep 27 05:07:27 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 22:07:27 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <5606E5BD.5010107@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> <5606E5BD.5010107@acm.org> Message-ID: <56074F5F.6000106@mail.utoronto.ca> Can someone please tell me what post everyone is objecting to, just in case it was me that said it and I need to apologize? I have expressed my reservations about having James as Chair....it removes him as an advocate on all things WHOIS. It is in my view a waste of a powerful ally that we will need. I understand of course that having a good neutral chair is important, but we dont need to spend one of our best allies on that position, in my view. cheers steph On 2015-09-26 14:36, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > If it was in jest, it was ill placed on a public list and others may > have had the same confusion I had in seeing it as a suggestion to be > considered. > > avri > > t > On 26-Sep-15 07:37, William Drake wrote: >>> On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Amr Elsadr >> > wrote: >>> >>> I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. >> You are not. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From avri Sun Sep 27 09:24:13 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 23:24:13 -0700 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56074F5F.6000106@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> <5606E5BD.5010107@acm.org> <56074F5F.6000106@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <56078B8D.8040803@acm.org> hi, wasn't you it was me > On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > >> On 25-Sep-15 02:40, William Drake wrote: >> >> It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch >> they pulled with Olga. > I hope not to see this. And do not see any context in which it can be > called fun. i was the one who was impolite enough to point out something i thought was problematic. avri On 26-Sep-15 19:07, Stephanie Perrin wrote: > Can someone please tell me what post everyone is objecting to, just in > case it was me that said it and I need to apologize? I have expressed > my reservations about having James as Chair....it removes him as an > advocate on all things WHOIS. It is in my view a waste of a powerful > ally that we will need. I understand of course that having a good > neutral chair is important, but we dont need to spend one of our best > allies on that position, in my view. > cheers steph > > On 2015-09-26 14:36, Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> If it was in jest, it was ill placed on a public list and others may >> have had the same confusion I had in seeing it as a suggestion to be >> considered. >> >> avri >> >> t >> On 26-Sep-15 07:37, William Drake wrote: >>>> On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Amr Elsadr >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. >>> You are not. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From stephanie.perrin Sun Sep 27 22:00:58 2015 From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 15:00:58 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56078B8D.8040803@acm.org> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> <5606E5BD.5010107@acm.org> <56074F5F.6000106@mail.utoronto.ca> <56078B8D.8040803@acm.org> Message-ID: <56083CEA.4030402@mail.utoronto.ca> Aw shucks, I thought someone had noticed something I said...:-)THat was a joke guys... cheers steph >> On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 25-Sep-15 02:40, William Drake wrote: >>> >>> It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch >>> they pulled with Olga. >> I hope not to see this. And do not see any context in which it can be >> called fun. > i was the one who was impolite enough to point out something i thought > was problematic. > > avri > > > On 26-Sep-15 19:07, Stephanie Perrin wrote: >> Can someone please tell me what post everyone is objecting to, just in >> case it was me that said it and I need to apologize? I have expressed >> my reservations about having James as Chair....it removes him as an >> advocate on all things WHOIS. It is in my view a waste of a powerful >> ally that we will need. I understand of course that having a good >> neutral chair is important, but we dont need to spend one of our best >> allies on that position, in my view. >> cheers steph >> >> On 2015-09-26 14:36, Avri Doria wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> If it was in jest, it was ill placed on a public list and others may >>> have had the same confusion I had in seeing it as a suggestion to be >>> considered. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> t >>> On 26-Sep-15 07:37, William Drake wrote: >>>>> On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Amr Elsadr >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. >>>> You are not. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>> 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 >> >> > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg From avri Mon Sep 28 15:28:20 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 08:28:20 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [urgent] NCPH candidate nomination In-Reply-To: <56083CEA.4030402@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <5603ED40.8040103@acm.org> <56041363.7000502@acm.org> <6DBC1C74-C06E-4413-BA1B-69290B7A632B@difference.com.au> <56055250.4@acm.org> <13A45EF9-AA43-4CC2-ABE5-1A623A07F0E6@toast.net> <4D783D87-0D1E-4F93-9C95-3ABFB135DE86@egyptig.org> <1b0361d04cba40fab13dc254168c2b3c@toast.net> <94503FB6-9959-48F7-BDFD-0BA4BFFC699F@egyptig.org> <5606E5BD.5010107@acm.org> <56074F5F.6000106@mail.utoronto.ca> <56078B8D.8040803@acm.org> <56083CEA.4030402@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <56093264.4050308@acm.org> noticed. avri On 27-Sep-15 15:00, Stephanie Perrin wrote: > Aw shucks, I thought someone had noticed something I said...:-)THat > was a joke guys... > cheers steph >>> On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 25-Sep-15 02:40, William Drake wrote: >>>> >>>> It?d also be fun to watch the faces if we did the same bait and switch >>>> they pulled with Olga. >>> I hope not to see this. And do not see any context in which it can be >>> called fun. >> i was the one who was impolite enough to point out something i thought >> was problematic. >> >> avri >> >> >> On 26-Sep-15 19:07, Stephanie Perrin wrote: >>> Can someone please tell me what post everyone is objecting to, just in >>> case it was me that said it and I need to apologize? I have expressed >>> my reservations about having James as Chair....it removes him as an >>> advocate on all things WHOIS. It is in my view a waste of a powerful >>> ally that we will need. I understand of course that having a good >>> neutral chair is important, but we dont need to spend one of our best >>> allies on that position, in my view. >>> cheers steph >>> >>> On 2015-09-26 14:36, Avri Doria wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> If it was in jest, it was ill placed on a public list and others may >>>> have had the same confusion I had in seeing it as a suggestion to be >>>> considered. >>>> >>>> avri >>>> >>>> t >>>> On 26-Sep-15 07:37, William Drake wrote: >>>>>> On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Amr Elsadr >>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I thought the suggestion was made in jest, anyway. Maybe I'm >>>>>> wrong. >>>>> You are not. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org >>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg >>>> --- >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list >>>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-NCSG mailing list >> 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 > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From avri Tue Sep 29 01:52:56 2015 From: avri (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 18:52:56 -0400 Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call: Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline and Resubmission of Motions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5609C4C8.4070202@acm.org> Hi, I need to give a response on this. Anyone suggest that I should object? I think it is ok. thanks avri PS. Who is going to be the next SCI rep for NCSG. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call: Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline and Resubmission of Motions Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:40:45 +0000 From: Julie Hedlund To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Dear SCI members, As discussed during the SCI call last week on 17 September, please see below the proposed letter from the SCI to the GNSO Council on the issue of the waiver of the 10-day motion deadline and resubmission of motions. */ /* */This is a consensus call./* Please indicate your agreement with, or objection to, the proposed letter. */If there are no objections or changes received by /**/_COB Tuesday, 29 September 2015_/**/, the letter will be presumed to be accepted by full consensus./* Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, On 05 March 2015 the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) submitted to the GNSO Council a Review Request (see attached) on the issue of whether the waiver of the 10-day deadline for the submission of motions can be applied to resubmitted motions. The Review Request was one of two that the Council approved at its meeting on 16 April 2015. The SCI is continuing to discuss the other Review Request from the Council for the SCI to consider codifying the current informal procedure for amendments to motions and to recommend any changes SCI believes (through full consensus) are appropriate. The SCI has determined after a review of the GNSO Operating Procedures that by its terms as previously approved by Council, the waiver of the 10-day deadline for submission of motions does _not_ apply to resubmitted motions. Further, after lengthy discussion of the possible issues, the SCI is reluctant to make any recommendations to change the current status of the Operating Procedures given that no instance of a problem arising in this regard has occurred. The SCI also notes that although changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures are not recommended at this time, the SCI could revisit the issue if requested by the Council and, specifically, if there is a contentious issue that warrants further analysis. Please let us know whether you or the Council have any questions or require further information concerning the SCI's response to this issue request. Best regards, Anne and Rudi Anne Aikman-Scalese, SCI Chair Rudi Vansnick, SCI Vice-Chair --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Review Request - Waiver & Resubmission - 5 Mar 2015.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 103039 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aelsadr Tue Sep 29 15:17:54 2015 From: aelsadr (Amr Elsadr) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:17:54 +0200 Subject: [PC-NCSG] [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call: Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline and Resubmission of Motions In-Reply-To: <5609C4C8.4070202@acm.org> References: <5609C4C8.4070202@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi, > On Sep 29, 2015, at 12:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > I need to give a response on this. > Anyone suggest that I should object? > > I think it is ok. So do I. I already OK?ed this on behalf of the NCUC (as I am the NCUC appointee to the SCI). > > thanks > > avri > > PS. Who is going to be the next SCI rep for NCSG. Would it be OK with you to hold off on your replacement, and pick this up again when the constituencies have had a chance to update their appointees to the NCSG PC? At that point, I believe we should also discuss elections for whoever will chair the PC for the coming year. Thanks. Amr > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call: Waiver of 10-Day > Motion Deadline and Resubmission of Motions > Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:40:45 +0000 > From: Julie Hedlund > To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > > > > Dear SCI members, > > As discussed during the SCI call last week on 17 September, please see > below the proposed letter from the SCI to the GNSO Council on the issue > of the waiver of the 10-day motion deadline and resubmission of motions. > */ > /* > */This is a consensus call./* > > Please indicate your agreement with, or objection to, the proposed > letter. */If there are no objections or changes received by /**/_COB > Tuesday, 29 September 2015_/**/, the letter will be presumed to be > accepted by full consensus./* > > Kind regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > ------------------------ > > Dear Jonathan, > > > > On 05 March 2015 the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation > (SCI) submitted to the GNSO Council a Review Request (see attached) on > the issue of whether the waiver of the 10-day deadline for the > submission of motions can be applied to resubmitted motions. The Review > Request was one of two that the Council approved at its meeting on 16 > April 2015. The SCI is continuing to discuss the other Review Request > from the Council for the SCI to consider codifying the current informal > procedure for amendments to motions and to recommend any changes SCI > believes (through full consensus) are appropriate. > > > > The SCI has determined after a review of the GNSO Operating Procedures > that by its terms as previously approved by Council, the waiver of the > 10-day deadline for submission of motions does _not_ apply to > resubmitted motions. Further, after lengthy discussion of the possible > issues, the SCI is reluctant to make any recommendations to change the > current status of the Operating Procedures given that no instance of a > problem arising in this regard has occurred. The SCI also notes that > although changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures are not recommended at > this time, the SCI could revisit the issue if requested by the Council > and, specifically, if there is a contentious issue that warrants further > analysis. > > > > Please let us know whether you or the Council have any questions or > require further information concerning the SCI's response to this issue > request. > > > > Best regards, > > Anne and Rudi > > > > Anne Aikman-Scalese, SCI Chair > > Rudi Vansnick, SCI Vice-Chair > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > _______________________________________________ > PC-NCSG mailing list > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg