[PC-NCSG] Reminder: Re: [council] FW: TR: Follow up / Invitation - RSVP - ICANN Leadership Training Programme (LTP) 2015

[Sam Lanfranco]

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 <Lanfran at yorku.ca> 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 <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> 
>>>> 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: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20150921/92c29c30/attachment-0001.html>