[NCSG-PC] Fwd: Interest in GNSO SSC

Wed Mar 29 02:25:50 EEST 2017

That is my understanding as well, Stephanie.

Just a quick clarification that the first meeting of the SSC is this week, on March 30th.

It looks like RySG has appointed Maxim, RrSG has appointed Frédéric, the BC has appointed Susan [though surely she must be recusing herself from the RDS Review discussions], Lori will be there from the IPC, Osvaldo from ISPCP, and Julf from NomCom.

- Ayden

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Interest in GNSO SSC
Local Time: 28 March 2017 7:56 PM
UTC Time: 28 March 2017 18:56
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
To: Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is, seeburnk at gmail.com

Thanks for your message Renata. It is hard to keep up with the state of play, but I think we are now back to having a confidential discussion tomorrow without the candidates, Matt is organizing. We are late in submitting names, as the first meeting is scheduled for April 30, but doubtless we shall get there eventually.

Best,

Stephanie

On 2017-03-28 14:44, Renata Aquino Ribeiro wrote:

Dear Stephanie and all

Thanks for your message.
I think the PC NCSG participants have a lot to discuss with this slate
of highly qualified candidates. I wish slates like these always happen
for selections.
I'm not on the PC NCSG list and I've also seen that some part of the
discussions members suggested to do it without the candidates, which I
can also understand.
If I am needed to provide any further information than that sent on my
candidacy statement, I'll hope that someone emails me.

Thanks

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Stephanie Perrin
[<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca)
wrote:

This comment is unfair, in my view, Tapani.  It was not a long, secret
discussion.  I asked the question on the public list at 19:58 amsterdam
time, as you can see below.  Stefi responded at 15:03 EDT that contestants
should be removed.  I put together the list and forgot you (sorry, but these
things happen, it was not deliberate) at16:04 EDT, asking if I had forgotten
anyone.  I added you the next morning after Matt pointed out I forgot you at
10:23 EDT.  I have forwarded three messages you missed. At any point you
could have fired off an email inquiring about the discussion, and whether
you had been omitted, had you noticed that the discussion on the PC list had
died following what appeared to be agreement to remove candidates.  I don't
really think the decision making on that was not transparent.
As I indicated earlier, it is only fair to add the other two contestants to
the discussion, now that it is on the PC list.  I do not believe they are
members. Accordingly, I am adding Renata and Kris.....Welcome to the
discussion on the Policy Committee list regarding choosing our
representatives for the GNSO Standing Selection Committee.

Cheers Stephanie

On 2017-03-27 15:52, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:

Dear all,

As it turns out the councillors involved in the decision had had long
email discussion about it without including me, I will stay out of
this decision and leave it to them to decide it as they see fit.

I will only say for the record that while I accept that non-public
discussions are sometimes necessary, I'd want them in any case to be
publicly known about. Perhaps we need a setup like the NomCom to be
able to debate and make this kind of decisions without publicity, but
if so I'd want that and related procedures to be agreed on in advance.

In any case I'm happy Matthew has taken the responsibility of
this and I trust he gets it done in time.

Tapani

On Mar 27 10:19, Stephanie Perrin (
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
) wrote:

I just meant that the discussion about the candidates should take place
without the candidates there.  Further, we have two candidates who are not
on the policy list, so we would in fairness have to add them if we were
going to have an open discussion on the PC list.

I think we should leave this an NCSG discussion and make all arguments based
on what makes the best slate of candidates.

SP

On 2017-03-27 02:08, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:

Hi Stefania and Stephanie,

I'm not sure what you mean by removing the contestants from the
conversation. Do you want to exclude them from even listening in?

If we have a call around this, should it not be recorded and
transcribed?

That would not ... be exactly transparent.

Otherwise, I agree they should not participate in the discussion about
the selection in general, but giving each an equal chance to make
their case would make sense. If we do arrange a call, giving each,
say, 5 minutes to speak might work.

A candidate statement would be nice, but time is perhaps too short for
that already.

As for the qualifications, two points:

First, ncuc/npoc/ncsg division: I don't see we can do more than
ensure there is at least one from each constituency, with the third
we can do whatever we like.

Second, besides qualifications already mentioned I think it'd make
sense to consider the workload. It might be better to pick a person
over another who'd be otherwise more qualified but who has more work
on her or his plate already.

Tapani

On Mar 26 19:03, Milan, Stefania (
Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu
) wrote:

Thanks, Steph.
I think the contestants should be removed from the conversation.

________________________________________
Da: NCSG-PC
[<ncsg-pc-bounces at lists.ncsg.is>](mailto:ncsg-pc-bounces at lists.ncsg.is)
per conto di Stephanie Perrin
[<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca)
Inviato: domenica 26 marzo 2017 19.58.50
A:
mshears at cdt.org
;
ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
Oggetto: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Interest in GNSO SSC

So we have a day left to get this sorted.

1.  Should the contestants be removed from the discussion or not?

2.  Do we have further commentary on what the qualifying characteristics we
are looking for might be?

3.  While we have argued for a seat for NPOC, NCUC and NCSG, that actually
might be hard to achieve.  I dont think anyone will argue about how we sort
this, as long as we arent going to try to fight it out at Council.

SP

On 2017-03-25 20:00,
mshears at cdt.org[<mailto:mshears at cdt.org>](mailto:mshears at cdt.org)
wrote:
Hi

The deadline for names is end of day 27 march.

So far we have diversity, experience and representativeness including of
constituencies as criteria.

My preference would be for the PC members who are not running to discuss the
candidates based on these criteria and try and reach agreement.  If that is
not possible or appropriate we can each suggest our preferred trio and see
if we have any rough consensus.  Other suggestions are welcome.

Matthew

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Stephanie Perrin
[<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca)
Sent: 25 March 2017 15:44
To:
ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is[<mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>](mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is)
Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Interest in GNSO SSC

What is the deadline again, and how are we arranging the voting?

cheers Stephanie

On 2017-03-25 03:24, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:

Hi Ayden,

I agree that diversity is indeed important. I would like to add that

for that reason we should also have both of our constituencies

represented.

I'm not so sure if this would be a good place for a newcomer though,

I'd like appointees to have at least some experience in this type of

work, even if perhaps not so much in ICANN.

Tapani

On Mar 24 12:33, Ayden Férdeline
(
icann at ferdeline.com[<mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>](mailto:icann at ferdeline.com)
) wrote:

My personal preference would be to adopt principles similar to those of the
SSC, which entails trying to achieve a balance of representativeness,
diversity, and sufficient experience. So I would hope our three
representatives have a mixture of experience levels within the ICANN
community (I would welcome there being one slot set aside for a newcomer),
diversity (I would not support all three candidates being the same gender,
if all candidates are sufficiently qualified), and representativeness
(ideally the three representatives will be from different geographic regions
though I appreciate this is an imperfect metric). Or is this too simplistic
a rubric for assessing the candidates?

- Ayden

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:23 pm, matthew shears
[<mshears at cdt.org>](mailto:mshears at cdt.org)[<mailto:mshears at cdt.org>](mailto:mshears at cdt.org)
wrote:

Hi

Given that Renata expressed an interest before the deadline yesterday and
that she has been having Internet challenges I believe that we should add
her candidacy to the mix.

Please respond to the e-mail on process I sent earlier. Obviously now with 5
candidates it is perhaps less clear that the "alternates" approach works.

I would appreciate therefore that we agree a set of criteria for the
selection process. Thoughts welcome.

Matthew

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:      Interest in GNSO SSC

Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 13:13:52 -0300

From:      Renata Aquino Ribeiro
[
[<raquino at gmail.com>](mailto:raquino at gmail.com)[<mailto:raquino at gmail.com>](mailto:raquino at gmail.com)
](
mailto:raquino at gmail.com
)

To:      Matthew Shears
[
[<mshears at cdt.org>](mailto:mshears at cdt.org)[<mailto:mshears at cdt.org>](mailto:mshears at cdt.org)
](
mailto:mshears at cdt.org
)

Dear Matthew

I'd like to express interest in serving as a volunteer on the GNSO Standing
Selection Committee.

I've joined several working groups on ICANN and have learned about the GNSO
work in 3 fellowship opportunities so far (1 as a fellow and 2 as coach) and
also participated as NCUC supported traveller in ICANN55.

I've also been on working groups related to reviews and procedures such as
GNSO Review and past working group SCI.

This would be an opportunity to learn more about working groups, teams and
appointments and also to help other community members who want to get more
involved to find their way into GNSO.

My SOI
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Renata+Aquino+Ribeiro+SOI
I had the impression I had sent this email before but you didn't receive it.
There are several flaws on my internet connection in Brazil this week so
please let me know if you received it and if there is still time for this
application.

Thanks

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:40:59 +0200

From: Tapani Tarvainen
[<ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO>](mailto:ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO)[<mailto:ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO>](mailto:ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO)
Subject: Call for volunteers - GNSO Standing Selection Committee - URGENT

Dear all,

See below. We need to appoint three (3) members to the SSC.

If you are interested and would like to volunteer for the task,

please let us know no later than Thursday, 23 March, 23:59 UTC.

Please read the council decision linked to below and explain why you

think you would be qualified for the task.

Note that there's no travel support, this is all done remotely, and

it looks like there will be a fair amount of work involved - make

sure you can commit yourself to the time required.

--

Tapani Tarvainen

----- Forwarded message from Nathalie Peregrine
[<nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>](mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org)[<mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>](mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org)
-----

Dear All,

On 15 March, the GNSO Council adopted the charter for the GNSO

Standing Selection Committee (SSC) – see
https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/draft-standing-selection-committee-15mar17-en.pdf
[gnso.icann.org]
<
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_drafts_draft-2Dstanding-2Dselection-2Dcommittee-2D15mar17-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=KmYsfcYHwH-JYXWIJ58L-ZnwETFBe1FrVJ8qghEsRV8&s=GmTt0n-0Bp3olHk5awt9BtmGRrEZnY7TI9fF4Fnvcy4&e=

[<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_drafts_draft-2Dstanding-2Dselection-2Dcommittee-2D15mar17-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=KmYsfcYHwH-JYXWIJ58L-ZnwETFBe1FrVJ8qghEsRV8&s=GmTt0n-0Bp3olHk5awt9BtmGRrEZnY7TI9fF4Fnvcy4&e=>](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_drafts_draft-2Dstanding-2Dselection-2Dcommittee-2D15mar17-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=KmYsfcYHwH-JYXWIJ58L-ZnwETFBe1FrVJ8qghEsRV8&s=GmTt0n-0Bp3olHk5awt9BtmGRrEZnY7TI9fF4Fnvcy4&e=)
.

The SSC is tasked, as requested by the GNSO Council, to 1), where

applicable, prepare and issue calls for applications related to the

selection or nomination of candidates for ICANN structures such as

ICANN review teams as well as structures related to the Empowered

Community, 2) review and evaluate all relevant applicants/candidates,

3) rank candidates and make selection/appointment recommendations for

review and approval by Council and 4) communicate selections to all

interested parties.

The membership structure of the SSC is as follows:

The SSC shall consist of a total of 9 members appointed as follows:

- One member appointed by each Stakeholder Group of the Contracted Party
House;

- One member appointed respectively from each of the Business Constituency,
the Intellectual Property Constituency, and the Internet Service Providers
and Connectivity Providers Constituency;

- Three members appointed by the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group; and,

- One member from one of the three Nominating-Committee appointees to the
GNSO Council.

The GNSO Council has tasked the SSC to carry out the review and

selection of GNSO endorsed candidates for the Registration Directory

Service Review Team for Council consideration at the latest by its 20

April 2017 meeting. Furthermore, the GNSO Council has tasked the SSC

to develop the criteria and the process for the selection of the GNSO

Representative to the Empowered Community for GNSO Council

consideration by its June 2017 meeting.

Your respective groups are requested to communicate their member(s) to

the SSC to the GNSO Secretariat

(
gnso-secs at icann.org[<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>](mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org)
)<mailto: [g <mailto: [g
<mailto: [g
[<mailto: [g
nso-secs at icann.org](mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org))>](mailto:nso-secs@<a class=)[<mailto:[gnso-secs at icann.org]%28mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org%29%29>](mailto:[gnso-secs at icann.org]%28mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org%29%29)
by 27 March at the

latest. A first meeting of the SSC will be scheduled for Thursday 30

March at 16.00 UTC.

Best regards,

Marika Konings

Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is

https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170328/feb794f5/attachment.htm>