[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Epdp-dt] Candidate Confidentiality
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Mon Jul 2 15:33:37 EEST 2018
I think we can justify it (and I believe it is necessary) because this
is the first time the interim spec power was used, and it is addressing
the single biggest policy issue we have repeated to resolve. Tight
council control, and greater transparency, is therefore necessary.
cheers Stephanie Perrin
On 2018-07-01 20:32, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi Ayden,
>
> it is difficult. The council rarely appointed for the case of GNSO PDP
> WG, while it did for CCWG and CWG cases. The SSC charter doesn't
> include a language about WGs but review teams, empowered community
> structures and so on as that was an addition brought by IANA
> stewardship transition, adding a chair selection task would be a
> precedent and may encourage doing that in future for any WG.
> as it is an exception, we should try to keep it limited. we can also
> argue about timing. SSC would need more time to proceed and get
> prepared following its charter.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> Le dim. 1 juil. 2018 à 23:49, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> a écrit :
>
> My gut reaction is that I agree on leaving this with Council
> leadership, but it's a hard argument to make. The SSC's charter
> does sound like it is whom we should be deferring to. How would
> you counter such an argument, Rafik?
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On 1 July 2018 7:47 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am concerned with moving selection to SSC. While it worked fine
>> for other appointments, I dont think it can do deliberation in
>> such short time. I would be in both options (and I will do my
>> best): leadership or SSC but former seems more quicker.
>> Names of candidates and statements are also made public , in
>> particular for review teams appointments.
>>
>> Best.
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2018, 1:07 PM Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org
>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Secrecy of the candidate statements is a non-starter. This
>> is a global public policy issue of great public interest and
>> it deserves appropriate public scrutiny. Too often people
>> forget that we are engaging in global governance at ICANN,
>> and ICANN’s commitment to transparency in its bylaws cannot
>> be ignored or lowered out of concerns about being in the
>> public eye. Accountability demands transparency in the
>> formulation of this critical global policy.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>>> On Jun 30, 2018, at 8:50 PM, dorothy g
>>> <dgdorothydg at gmail.com <mailto:dgdorothydg at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It should be made clear to candidates upfront that these
>>> statements will be in public domain. These are positions
>>> affect the community and the community has the right to know.
>>> best
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Ayden Férdeline
>>> <icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> There should be transparency here. I actually think
>>> candidate statements (and especially conflict of
>>> interest statements) should be made public. The claim of
>>> being "sensitive to privacy" is one I am finding
>>> difficult to understand.
>>>
>>> Ayden
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 20:19, Martin Pablo Silva Valent
>>> <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Any strong opinions here? This proposal changes the
>>>> general understanding of, yesterday.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>
>>>>> *From: *Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se
>>>>> <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se>>
>>>>> *Subject: **Re: [Epdp-dt] Candidate Confidentiality*
>>>>> *Date: *29 June 2018 at 08:22:22 EST
>>>>> *To: *epdp-dt at icann.org <mailto:epdp-dt at icann.org>,
>>>>> Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org
>>>>> <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I support Donna's position, particularly as the
>>>>> expectation on neutrality (perceived or real) may
>>>>> depend on the eye of the beholder.
>>>>>
>>>>> As Michelle expressed during one of the meetings, who
>>>>> has no vested interest in the results of this PDP?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> safe travels to all
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>>>>> carlosraul at gutierrez.se <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se>
>>>>> +506 8837 7176
>>>>> Aparatado 1571-1000
>>>>> COSTA RICA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> El 2018-06-29 07:34, Austin, Donna via Epdp-dt escribió:
>>>>>
>>>>>> All
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apologies for missing this discussion yesterday. I
>>>>>> want to express my reservations about the agreement
>>>>>> that the EPDP Chair candidate names be made public. I
>>>>>> believe they should be confidential or, at a minimum,
>>>>>> the candidates should at least have the option to
>>>>>> decide whether they wish to have their candidacy made
>>>>>> public. Given the subject matter of this PDP, I
>>>>>> thought we might be a bit more sensitive to privacy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm also disappointed that the selection task falls
>>>>>> to the leadership team. We established a standing
>>>>>> selection committee for this purpose. I understand
>>>>>> the concerns about being able to undertake the task
>>>>>> quickly, but this same pressure will be on the
>>>>>> leadership team as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the candidate names are public this also puts
>>>>>> considerable pressure on the leadership team in terms
>>>>>> of lobbying and claims of bias in selection etc. We
>>>>>> may also have potential conflicts of interest arise
>>>>>> and as there is only three of us this would leave the
>>>>>> job to two. The SSC is more representative of the
>>>>>> GNSO and has a methodology in place for selections as
>>>>>> a result of the processes they've undertaken to date.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Donna
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *100*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Epdp-dt mailing list
>>>>>> Epdp-dt at icann.org <mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/epdp-dt
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Epdp-dt mailing list
>>>>> Epdp-dt at icann.org <mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/epdp-dt
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180702/48140927/attachment.htm>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list