[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Ncph-intersessional2017] Board Seat Selection Process

Rafik Dammak rafik.dammak at gmail.com
Tue Feb 28 08:09:06 EET 2017


Hi,

we can suggest nomination period between Wednesday 1st March and Friday
10th March, assuming that all candidates will be in Copenhagen.

Best,

Rafik

2017-02-27 23:27 GMT+09:00 Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net>:

> In terms of timeline, I'd suggest we try to get nominations in before
> Copenhagen and perhaps use ICANN 58 as a time to get to know the candidates
> better, perhaps invite them to our PC or regular SG meeting etc. Let's use
> the less than perfect timing to our advantage!
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From*: "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> *Sent*: Monday, February 27, 2017 2:06 PM
> *To*: "avri at acm.org" <avri at acm.org>
> *Cc*: "ncsg-pc" <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> *Subject*: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Ncph-intersessional2017] Board Seat
> Selection Process
>
> Hi Avri,
>
> thanks for the suggestion,
>
> so we have now:
> - we cannot accept CSG proposal.
> - we can start the nomination process, for NCSG and CSG in parallel
> starting (Wednesday?)
>
> 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
>   * a joint interview of the top 2 before second round with the whole
> house.
>   * 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.
>
> we need to agree quickly on procedure for NCSG and document that.
> can we get consensus this by Tuesday 12:00pm UTC and respond ot CSG?
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
> 2017-02-24
>  21:42 GMT+09:00 avri doria <avri at acm.org>:
>>
>>
>>
>> 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_RaHGu
>> m4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing
>> >     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHG
>> um4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing>
>> >     >>>
>> >      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHGu
>> m4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/edit?usp=sharing
>> >     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lx8jCTEWGAuPyPpnL_RaHG
>> um4dQXf2a1MTyYXx8O9dc/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
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170228/3cd24cd0/attachment.htm>


More information about the NCSG-PC mailing list