[NCSG-PC] Board Seat 14/ appointment process

Tue Jun 12 14:29:50 EEST 2018

Dear Rafik,

I totally concur based on the rationale given.

Kind Regards

Poncelet

On 12 June 2018 at 07:26, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi ,
>
> Thanks Farzaneh, I concurr with your explanations and rationale.
> @Ayden with regard to statement of Interest, I am thinking if we can put
> that as annex and maybe develop more like some set questions and so on.
> just to not emphasize one information compared to others.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le mar. 12 juin 2018 à 01:14, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Thanks very much for sharing this, Farzaneh. Please find attached some
>> suggested edits. In particular, I would like to broadly define what
>> information should be contained within the Statement of Interest sought
>> from each candidate. There is no implied criticism here (to be clear, I am
>> not suggesting that past statements were inadequate) - just wanting to make
>> sure we capture certain information in the future in the interest of
>> transparency. I have also re-worded one sentence to do with the NCSG
>> consulting with members - all the CSG needs to know is we come to a
>> consensus as a stakeholder group, how is up to us...
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On 11 June 2018 5:59 PM, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks David.
>>
>> CSG got back to us and they are happy with the procedure as is with a
>> minor change in the document I have attached.
>>
>> We need to discuss this in more detail. On the one hand, we cannot change
>> CSG internal procedure. How would we feel if they wanted to change our
>> internal procedure? On the other hand what you are raising has been an
>> issue within the community.
>>
>> As to NCA, NCA has an advisory role anyhow in the council as well.If it
>> doesn't provide an advantage (and let's face it, sometimes NCAs would work
>> against us or would work against both NCSG and CSG) then why not keep the
>> role advisory?
>>
>> I am not disagreeing. I am just putting these questions out there for the
>> veterans to tell us why we should not accept the procedure as is.
>>
>> When I was at the WT on GNSO bylaws changes, we insisted on giving NCA a
>> role in the empowered community when it came to appointments. This was
>> because as we argued, NCA could take you out of a deadlock. We argued the
>> same here, but CSG did not accept the argument. Considering that NomCom
>> appointments recently to the GNSO have been almost disasterous (for example
>> they appointed a government person to GNSO!!) I wonder if we want them
>> fully involved with the process.
>>
>> We might continue this discussion with CSG depending on the feedback I
>> receive here, so please keep the feedback coming, but please also provide
>> solutions that can be a middle way of what they want and what we want.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 2:30 PM, David Cake <dave at davecake.net> wrote:
>>
>>> My apologies for taking a while to comment on this.
>>>
>>> I admit to disliking this draft, it has significantly changed from the
>>> old procedure and none of the changes seem positive to me.
>>>
>>> The NCA is effectively rendered irrelevant. Included as an adviser is
>>> meaningless, as far as I can tell. While the NCA offers no particular
>>> advantage to NCSG, I think it is a definite step back in terms of creating
>>> an open procedure. .
>>>
>>> And it effectively removes the vote of individual councillors entirely.
>>> NCSG only reluctantly adopted binding councillors individual votes as a
>>> counter tactic to the CSG, and this procedure enshrines that permanently,
>>> effectively saying there is no hope that the CSG will have any internal
>>> democracy, so we shouldn’t bother with the potential for it. And it
>>> entirely lacks any procedure for coming to an outcome if full consensus
>>> can’t be found, other than rinse and repeat.
>>>
>>> If it was to be adopted, we would at least need a new procedure to
>>> determine how leadership consensus will be determined, if there is a
>>> minority opinion.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 Mar 2018, at 10:31 am, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> all
>>>
>>> here is the second draft of board appointment procedure. CSG accepted
>>> NCA to be involved with the process but have an advisory role. It also
>>> accepted to have elections but vote as a block (NCSG and CSG)
>>>
>>>
>>> Let me know what you think.
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>> <Board-Seat14-NCSG-Proposal .docx>________________________
>>> _______________________
>>> 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
>
>

-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd

*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://signaraglobalsolutions.com/
<http://signaraglobalsolutions.com/>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org
<http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com <http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org
<http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
<http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180612/4e15bb35/attachment.htm>