[NCSG-PC] Board seat nomination
Rafik Dammak
rafik.dammak at gmail.com
Fri Mar 10 09:43:29 EET 2017
Hi All,
the deadline was suggested for nomination is today. we have till now 2
names: Markus Kummer and Mathew Shears.
if we are ok with this, I will send the names to CSG today. I think most of
you are already in Copenhagen, so please share your thought by 16:00 local
Time.
we didn't respond yet to Greg questions, and I guess the best way is to
suggest a meeting with and discussing the process based on the proposal we
have.
Best,
Rafik
2017-03-07 19:52 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>:
> Hi everyone,
>
> As we agreed before, we have to get candidates nominated for the board
> seat election by this Friday.
>
> We don't have a procedure written yet but we need to act here: nominating
> and documenting the process.
>
> I am thinking we should encourage people to nominate but not
> self-nomination. And because time constraint to make the nomination by PC
> members and keeping NCSG members informed about the process.
> Any volunteer to help me to document the process.
> It is not optimal but I sensed from the discussion that we got to be
> proactive.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> On Mar 1, 2017 9:58 PM, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ed,
>
> Thanks for the message, yes this something we have to agree and act
> quickly on it.
> I think that was/should be nomination by others and within PC, but looking
> to hear from others too. We got till 10th March to get nominees.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2017-03-01 21:54 GMT+09:00 Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net>:
>
>> Thanks Rafik.
>>
>> One question; Are nominations within our group to be self nominations,
>> nominations by others, both, and opened to the general membership or just
>> members of the PC?
>>
>> I'm sorry to ask what may be basic questions but I haven't been involved
>> in the Board selection process before and would just like to fully
>> understand the process.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From*: "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> *Sent*: Wednesday, March 1, 2017 12:49 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 everyone,
>>
>> since there was no objection, I will send our response to CSG and also
>> our suggestion for nomination period to run from 1st March to 10th March .
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2017-02-27 23:05 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> 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/20170310/9ad0d16a/attachment.htm>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list