[NCSG-PC] My suggested response to Lori on board seat 14

[Johan Helsingius]

Hi Lori,

I am glad we both agree with the need for the intersessionals to
come back. I already discussed it with Sally, and seems Org is
very supportive of the idea.

Apologies for not being clear enough in my question about your phrase
"our Board incumbents", it was not so much about the word "incumbents"
but about the word "our".

I don't think we see the same need (and especially urgency) to revise
the 2018 agreement as CSG does. From one point of view, the possibility
of deadlock is a potential problem, but it also forces us to work
together better. In this case of the current appointment issue, I think
both parties have to share the blame for not starting the process
earlier, and working together to find a mutually acceptable candidate.

I don't think we should tie the two issues together. Any changes to the
2018 agreement need to be thoroughly considered and discussed on both
sides, and will take a fair bit of time. Meanwhile we need to appoint
someone for board seat 14 as soon as possible.

The NomCom "extraordinary/exceptional performance" standard might be
appropriate for the NomCom appointed board members, as the NomCom is
tasked with bringing in outsiders and new blood, but it is less suitable
for SO/AC appointees.

While you have explained your reservations with Matthew, it would help
me if you could list them again, as detailed, clear an unambiguous as
possible so that I don't misinterpret or miscommunicate them to our
executive and policy teams.

As to my comment about us possibly being able to support Mark 3 years
from now, the emphasis is on "possibly", and it would require him
to develop much more support, experience and character - not something
that will happen overnight. My comment should not be seen as a
signal that we could be convinced to accept Mark. He was reviewed
and interviewed not just by our executive team, but also by members
of our policy committee (that is responsible for appointing
our representatives to PDPs and working groups), and not a single
member supported him. While his inexperience and lack of gravitas
are the most important reason, the team raised a lot of other concerns
and issues. We don't see Mark as a viable candidate.

I am happy to facilitate a call between your ExCom and our EC and PC,
but meanwhile we are somewhat surprised and disappointed that you
don't seem to have given our alternative candidate, Rafik, any serious
consideration.

Kind regards,

	Julf