[NCSG-PC] Seating of EPDP Alternates

[David Cake]

> On 24 Jul 2018, at 11:07 am, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Just thought I’d start this conversation off now re: how and when we appoint alternates.
> 
> 1) I think it would be beneficial for the NCSG to have 100% coverage on all calls; wherever possible we should not have calls where there are not 6 NCSG members present. Is this reasonable?

	I agree. We should always use an alternate where we can.
> 
> 2) How will we appoint alternates? Is this something that should be arranged by the NCSG Chair, or is it an individual responsibility to find an alternate to cover us where we are unavailable?


> 3) Do we want rotation to be in place to ensure that all alternates are, to the greatest extent possible, invited to be an alternate for an equal number of calls? Or should other factors be considered, i.e. timezone of call/alternate, subject matter?

	I am not concerned with being on an equal number of calls, and I think both timezone (as usual, I expect some calls to be on at an insane time for my timezone, often 3am or 4am, I obviously would prefer to avoid those calls) and subject matter (EG I am not a lawyer) would be appropriate. There may even be cases where we may wish to sub in alternates just for subject matter expertise (eg Tatiana and myself for different aspects of cybersecurity), though in general I have full confidence that our full delegates between them will cover the areas excellently.

	David

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180725/24d51f2c/attachment.sig>