[PC-NCSG] GNSO Vice Chair selection

[Tapani Tarvainen]

Yes. There're other open issues, too, like what happens if
for whatever reason the rotation is occasionally broken.

E.g., both SGs might agree that the NCA is best VC on
some occasion, or one SG might voluntarily give up
their turn (maybe just for one year) for some reason -
would they get it back later (3-year run)?

So let's try to think of all possible problem scenarios,
especially all seen in the past but also whatever new
ones we can imagine, and see how we can improve on this.

Tapani

On Oct 12 12:50, Amr Elsadr (aelsadr at egyptig.org) wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I agree with Avri. Also, this process doesn?t take into consideration what would happen if the GNSO Chair was from the NCPH. This should also be considered. Doesn?t make sense to me to have both a Chair and a Vice-Chair from the same SG.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Amr
> 
> > On Oct 12, 2016, at 1:26 PM, avri doria <avri at APC.ORG> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > point 8 is a problem.
> > 
> > that is where they nailed us last time.
> > 
> > if they dont accept the first offered candidate, then the selecting SG
> > should just select again. 
> > 
> > this is a bad deal, i recommend you do not accept.
> > 
> > 
> > avrio
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 11-Oct-16 22:17, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >> 
> >> Following up the discussion during our policy call about GNSO VC
> >> selection, I got the following proposal from the CSG. It looks pretty
> >> good to me, although there're some details that need more work.
> >> 
> >> Comments welcome.
> >>