[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Ncph-intersessional2017] Board Seat Selection Process
avri doria
avri at apc.org
Sat Feb 25 16:34:50 EET 2017
one thought. you may want to schedule a joint interview of the top 2
before second round.
with the whole house invited so that what they tell one is what they
tell the other.
avri
On 24-Feb-17 07:42, avri doria wrote:
>
>
> some minor typo corrections
>
> Our counter-proposal is:
>
> * NCA is not to removed from any part of the process
> * there must be a vote along the previous lines - 8 to succeed.
> * as many nominees as come forward in a week.
> * 1st round if one gets 8 then done, if not second round between top two
> * 2nd round if one get 8 then done, if not do 3rd round of leader
> against NOTA
> * 3rd round if person does not get 8, leave the seat open until we get
> our act together.
> * then CSG PCs, NCSG PC, NCPH council members and NCA talk until we
> get our act together.
>
> On 24-Feb-17 00:31, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks Avri, Matt, Ed for comments and suggestions
>>
>> I guess we say:
>> - we cannot accept CSG proposal.
>> - However, we can start the nomination process, for NCSG and CSG in
>> parallel starting next week Monday
>> - Our counter-proposal is:
>>
>> * NCA is not to removed from any part of the process
>> * there must be a vote along the previous lines - 8 to succeed.
>> * as many nominees as come forward in a week.
>> * 1st round if one get 8 done, if not second round between top two
>> * 2nd round if one get 8 done, if not do 3rd round of leader against
>> NOTA
>> * 3rd round if person does not get 8, leave the seat open until we
>> get our act together.
>> * then CSG PC, NCSG PC, NCPH council members and NCA talk until we
>> get our act together.
>>
>> if we have a consensus by Sunday, we should share our response with CSG.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2017-02-24 9:29 GMT+09:00 avri doria <avri at apc.org <mailto:avri at apc.org>>:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we could respond that we do not accept their proposal
>>
>> - NCA is not to removed from any part of the process
>>
>> - we insist that there be a vote along the previous lines - 8 to
>> succeed.
>>
>> - as many nominees as come forward in a week.
>>
>> - 1st round if one get 8 done, if not second round between top two
>>
>> - 2nd round if one get 8 done, if not do 3rd round of leader
>> against NOTA
>>
>> - 3rd round if person does not get 8, leave seat open until we get our
>> act together.
>>
>> - then CSG PC, NCSG PC, NCPH council members and NCA talk until
>> we get
>> our act together.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 23-Feb-17 05:49, matthew shears wrote:
>> >
>> > Perhaps as a first step go back to CSG and say we are considering/or
>> > not their doc and will be proposing something or an alternative
>> > version - and put some deadline on it for us - maybe end of next
>> week?
>> >
>> > And, try to get agreement on a nomination period - say next
>> week? or
>> > two weeks from Monday? Probably would be useful to have the
>> CSG and
>> > NCSG nomination periods run in parallel. Agree with CSG whether
>> > should be nomination and/or self nomination.
>> >
>> > In the interim start work on the process?
>> >
>> > Matthew
>> >
>> >
>> > On 23/02/2017 08:07, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> we really need to develop our response or proposal to CSG
>> quickly. at
>> >> least covering the topic of nomination.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Rafik
>> >>
>> >> 2017-02-22 11:27 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> >> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>>:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Matt,
>> >>
>> >> thanks for the response, looking for other comments on this
>> topic.
>> >> I think we can start with nomination whole we work on the
>> process
>> >> and adjust the whole timeline.
>> >> how we shall proceed for nominations, we have 2 candidates for
>> >> now. shall we initiate a process to find other candidates? we
>> >> don't have so much time for a long nomination period.
>> >>
>> >> I understand that we are having the deadline as a mean to press
>> >> us but we should stand and be clear about the aspects which are
>> >> non-negotiable with regard to the process.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Rafik
>> >>
>> >> 2017-02-21 19:13 GMT+09:00 matthew shears <mshears at cdt.org
>> <mailto:mshears at cdt.org>
>> >> <mailto:mshears at cdt.org <mailto:mshears at cdt.org>>>:
>> >>
>> >> Thanks Rafik
>> >>
>> >> Not sure much was agreed except that we need to deal
>> with it
>> >> and we are running out of time.
>> >>
>> >> First we had the timeline from Greg before the meeting,
>> which
>> >> was not really discussed further. Then we had some general
>> >> discussion about the need to do something on the Board
>> >> selection process. People voiced their views on different
>> >> aspects of the process and there was concern over the
>> >> timeline, but we did not really decide anything (others
>> >> please jump in as I may have missed some important
>> >> aspects). Markus announced he wanted to continue in the
>> >> role; I announced I was going to run. Then the CSG
>> proposal
>> >> for a process was circulated on Thurs AM. There seemed
>> to be
>> >> general agreement that the CSG proposal was not ideal.
>> >>
>> >> I think the key immediate thing is us agreeing a
>> process and
>> >> timeline for nominations and getting that announced, so at
>> >> least the initial stages of the process are underway.
>> >>
>> >> Matthew
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 20/02/2017 10:56, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> >>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>
>> >>> We got this note from Greg to resume the discussion on
>> board
>> >>> seat election.
>> >>> First thing, is it possible to get a summary of what
>> or not
>> >>> agreed on iceland on that regard from those who attended
>> >>> intersessional?
>> >>>
>> >>> We also need to outline what are our non-negotiable points
>> >>> such as having vote, NCA participation and so on.
>> >>>
>> >>> I think tgat the CSG proposal from last week is far
>> from our
>> >>> expectations.
>> >>> There is also proposal to have a call. We can have it
>> by end
>> >>> of this week but we do need to be ready.
>> >>>
>> >>> Best,
>> >>>
>> >>> Rafik
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>> From: "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>> >>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>>
>> >>> Date: Feb 20, 2017 2:13 PM
>> >>> Subject: [Ncph-intersessional2017] Board Seat
>> Selection Process
>> >>> To: <ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org
>> <mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>
>> >>> <mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org
>> <mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>>>
>> >>> Cc:
>> >>>
>> >>> All,
>> >>>
>> >>> We probably need a different mailing list to finish
>> >>> working on the Board Seat selection process, and a
>> small
>> >>> group to do it, but I'll start here, since I think
>> this
>> >>> is the only active mailing list with both sides of the
>> >>> NCPH on it.
>> >>>
>> >>> We basically have no time to work this out, and we've
>> >>> already started the process without knowing what it is
>> >>> exactly, since we have now received nominations.
>> >>>
>> >>> In addition to the adaptation of the CPH procedures
>> >>> previously circulated, I'm also attaching the
>> following
>> >>> for consideration:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. Some bullet-points from an exchange between
>> CSG and
>> >>> NCSG representatives outlining a potential draft
>> process.
>> >>> 2. The latest version of the ICANN Staff Memo with a
>> >>> revised draft timeline and some relevant excerpts from
>> >>> Bylaws and GNSO Procedures.
>> >>> 3. A further excerpt from the Bylaws, with Section
>> >>> 11.3(f), which covers the selection process for Seats
>> >>> 13-14 (to the extent that is covered in the
>> Bylaws), and
>> >>> Section 11.3(h), which is referred to in Section
>> 11.3(f).
>> >>>
>> >>> A few thoughts and comments:
>> >>>
>> >>> A. We only have 10 1/2 weeks to both develop and go
>> >>> through a process that is contemplated to take 21
>> weeks
>> >>> (just to go through). Talk about building the
>> airplane
>> >>> in the air.
>> >>>
>> >>> B. At the Intersessional, we discussed possible
>> >>> adjustments to the timeline, but did not come to any
>> >>> decisions. It's not clear to me whether Staff is
>> >>> preparing a further revised draft. I'll ask.
>> >>>
>> >>> C. If any of our groups have not already done so, we
>> >>> should put out a call for any other nominations ASAP
>> >>> (though it would be nice to know the end of the
>> >>> nomination period).
>> >>>
>> >>> D. Without making any judgments, the CPH process and
>> >>> the NCPH bullet-points are significantly different
>> when
>> >>> it comes to voting.
>> >>>
>> >>> E. We should figure out how to get this process
>> agreed
>> >>> as quickly as possible. Given the unusual
>> >>> circumstances, we don't need to use this process as
>> >>> precedent for any future process. We just need to get
>> >>> through this selection. One approach is for NCSG to
>> >>> respond to the draft sent at the end of the
>> >>> Intersessional. However, given the gap between
>> that and
>> >>> the bullet-points, it might just be better to
>> arrange a
>> >>> call/Adobe Connect session ASAP to move the ball
>> forward.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for reading,
>> >>>
>> >>> Greg
>> >>>
>> >>> P.S. It's not all that important how we got here, but
>> >>> nonetheless, it should be noted that the GNSO
>> Procedures
>> >>> were never updated from 2012, when the Bylaws deadline
>> >>> for naming the Director was changed from one month to
>> >>> two months (briefly) and then six months prior to
>> being
>> >>> seated. (The GNSO Procedures will need to be
>> updated in
>> >>> any event, since the Bylaws references are now
>> >>> obsolete.)) The draft bullet-points repeated this
>> error.
>> >>>
>> >>> B. Since we are doing this with very little time
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *Greg Shatan
>> >>> *C: 917-816-6428
>> >>> S: gsshatan
>> >>> Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428
>> >>> gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>> From: *Greg Shatan* <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>> >>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>>
>> >>> Date: Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 5:28 AM
>> >>> Subject: Discussion Draft of Interim Board
>> Selection Process
>> >>> To: ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org
>> <mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>
>> >>> <mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org
>> <mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> NCSG/NCUC/NPOC Intersessional Participants,
>> >>>
>> >>> The CSG prepared a "discussion draft" of a proposed
>> >>> interim Board Selection Process based closely on the
>> >>> Final Process adopted by the Contracted Parties House.
>> >>> Clean and marked drafts are attached, showing changes
>> >>> from the CPH document.
>> >>>
>> >>> A Google Docs version can be found here, where any
>> >>> suggested changes can be added in "suggest" mode (but
>> >>> everyone has "edit"
>> >>> rights):
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHGum4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHGum4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing>
>> >>>
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHGum4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHGum4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing>>
>> >>>
>> >>> We would hope to use this for the current 2017 Board
>> >>> Seat process and then revisit afterward before
>> making it
>> >>> a permanent rather than "interim" process.
>> >>>
>> >>> This has not been reviewed by the membership of
>> the IPC,
>> >>> BC and ISPCP, but we wanted to start the discussion on
>> >>> this basis, given the short amount of time we have for
>> >>> this year.
>> >>>
>> >>> We look forward to your thoughts.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>>
>> >>> Greg (on behalf of BC/IPC/ISPCP Intersessional Teams)
>> >>>
>> >>> *Greg Shatan
>> >>> *C: 917-816-6428 <tel:%28917%29%20816-6428>
>> >>> S: gsshatan
>> >>> Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428
>> <tel:%28646%29%20845-9428>
>> >>> gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Ncph-intersessional2017 mailing list
>> >>> Ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org
>> <mailto:Ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>
>> >>> <mailto:Ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org
>> <mailto:Ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>>
>> >>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncph-intersessional2017
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncph-intersessional2017>
>> >>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncph-intersessional2017
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncph-intersessional2017>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>>
>> >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>> >>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> ------------
>> >> Matthew Shears
>> >> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>> >> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
>> >> + 44 771 2472987 <tel:%2B%2044%20771%202472987>
>> <tel:+44%207712%20472987>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>> > --
>> > ------------
>> > Matthew Shears
>> > Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>> > Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
>> > + 44 771 2472987 <tel:%2B%2044%20771%202472987>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > NCSG-PC mailing list
>> > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>
>>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list