[NCSG-PC] Fwd: Request for NSCG endorsement -- GNSO Liaison to the GAC

[Arsène Tungali]

I am okay with that.

-----------------
Arsène Tungali,
about.me/ArseneTungali
+243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo

Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos)

> On Sep 8, 2017, at 2:28 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> due to the time constraint and since we have 2 candidates, we can endorse both and send their applications to SSC. if there is no objection, I can submit them just before 23:59UTC.
> looking to hear from other PC members.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> 2017-09-08 16:50 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I propose endorsing both. We are only asked, I believe, to support their candidacies — we have not been delegated the responsibility as PC of selecting the liaison. 
>> 
>> Best wishes,
>> 
>> Ayden Férdeline 
>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 8:41 am, Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> So how are we doing this? Do we vote by a formal poll or are we just posting on here? ----------------- Arsène Tungali, about.me/ArseneTungali +243 993810967 GPG: 523644A0 Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos) > On Sep 8, 2017, at 7:15 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: > > Re-sending with the attachment. > > Tapani > > ----- Forwarded message from Paul Rosenzweig ----- > > Dear Tapani (and Farzaneh as incoming Chair) > > I am writing to request that you consider endorsing me to be the GNSO > Liaison to the GAC. My current SOI is here: > https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Paul+Rosenzweig+SOI > > My completed application template follows: > > APPLICATION TEMPLATE > > Name Paul Rosenzweig > Affiliation The Heritage Foundation/Red Branch > Consulting -- part of the NCSG > > Please provide an overview of your experience/expertise with GNSO policy > development processes: Since 2014, I have been an active > member of the CCWG-A in both WS1 and WS2 regarding accountability mechanisms > related to the ICANN transition. As such I have participated in the full > gamut of related GNSO/NCSG policy issue that are of applicability to that > context. Given my legal background, I have particularly focused on legal > issues -- viz, ICANN's revised mission statement, the new Independent Review > Process, and ongoing considerations of jurisdictional issues. I have been, > and remain, especially focused on areas where the influence of the GAC seems > to reflect governmental interests that are inconsistent with GNSO policy. > > Please provide an overview of your Previous engagements in GNSO work in a > leadership capacity: I have not had a previous opportunity to serve in > the GNSO or NCSG in a leadership capacity. This is the first instance in > which I have volunteered for such a position. > > Please describe your familiarity with GAC processes, including GAC > engagement in GNSO policy development: As part of my work > with the CCWG-A I came to be intimately familiar with GAC processes for > engaging in GNSO policy development. I suspect that few in the GNSO have > paid quite as much attention as I have to the GAC's rules of operation, its > definition of consensus, and the ways in which it is permitted to influence > ICANN policy. Indeed the changes to those processes were one of the > particular focuses of my interest in the CCWG-A and one of the reasons I was > skeptical of the ultimate product of the CCWG and the resulting changes to > ICANN's methods for considering GAC advice. I remain of the view that GAC > engagement in GNSO policy development is essential but that it should be > accomplished through established GAC-GNSO liaison procedures and not through > extra-procedural fiat. By way of example, > I have been vocal in my view that the GAC's intervention with the Board > regarding two letter second level top level domains was procedurally > improper (and also disappointed that the GNSO liaison to the GAC had not > alerted the GNSO to this issue earlier. [And, though neutrality is a > hallmark of a good liaison, I should also make clear that I find GAC claims > that second level two-letter domains should be restricted deeply > unpersuasive and antithetical to policies that animate the NCSG and the > GNSO]. > > Please provide any other information that demonstrates your qualifications > for this position: It is perhaps of relevance that I have a > history of service in the US government and thus a reasonable understanding > of the role of governments. In the 2005-09 time period I twice served as > the Acting Assistant Secretary for International Affairs at the Department > of Homeland Security, and thus experience in international diplomatic > contexts. I attach a full resume for your consideration. > > I would be happy to answer any further questions you or other members of the > NCSG might have. > > Regards > Paul > > Paul Rosenzweig > Red Branch Consulting, PLLC > 509 C St. NE > Washington, DC 20002 > paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com > O: +1 (202) 547-0660 > M: +1 (202) 329-9650 > VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 > www.redbranchconsulting.com > www.paulrosenzweigesq.com > My PGP Key: > https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 > > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc _______________________________________________ NCSG-PC mailing list NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20170908/caeb19ab/attachment.htm>