From julf at Julf.com Mon May 1 14:20:28 2023 From: julf at Julf.com (Johan Helsingius) Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 13:20:28 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [NCSG-EC] Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2061a755-e609-22f7-7378-317eb8b9962d@Julf.com> FYI... -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [NCSG-EC] Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 11:09:12 +0000 From: Lori Schulman via NCSG-EC Reply-To: Lori Schulman To: Johan Helsingius CC: ncsg-pc , philippe.fouquart at orange.com , Mohr, Susan , Tim Smith , csg-excomm at ICANN.org , NCSG-EC , 'Brian King' , MCole at perkinscoie.com Hi Julf, Thank you for your response below.? The CSG requests that NCSG agree to mediation on the selection of the Board Seat 14.? We recommend engaging ICANN's staff mediator, Melissa Peters Allgood. It seems we have fundamental differences in 4 areas: * understanding the criteria for Board member selection * ability to assess Board member performance including the conditions regarding the renewal of a sitting Board member, * importance of solving the persistent issue of stalemate; and * setting clear priorities for NCPH Board members to represent interests across the House as appropriate We see the current 2018 agreement as unworkable with major gaps.? Our priority is to correct it now.?? As stated before, we reserve the right to interview Rafik or suggesting any other new candidates.? We disagree about the benefits of "being forced to work together" vis a vis the potential for deadlock. It needn't take an extraordinary amount of time if we commit to agree on our common interests and resolve the open issues described above. The time is better spent on resolving issues than entering indefinite rounds of candidate interviews. We strongly believe that professional mediation will help expedite the process. With kind regards, Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman lschulman at inta.org, www.inta.org -----Original Message----- From: Johan Helsingius Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2023 9:36 PM To: Lori Schulman Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 21:34:46 +0200 From: Johan Helsingius > To: Lori Schulman > CC: csg-excomm at ICANN.org

>, Mohr, Susan >, Tim Smith >, 'Brian King' >, MCole at perkinscoie.com >, philippe.fouquart at orange.com >, NCSG EC >, ncsg-pc > 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 previously explained your reservations with Matthew in general, listing them again, in detail, would help provide a clear and unambiguous understanding the objections that CSG has. This would also prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views 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 and experience - 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, and I hope you will respect the judgement of our EC and PC. 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 On 21/04/2023 19:46, Lori Schulman wrote: > Hi Julf, > Thank you for checking.? I agree that we desperately need an > intersessional.?? When I say "incumbent/s".? I mean current seat > holder/s without mentioning specific names.? Before we organize one, I > have a few questions: > 1) Does NCSG see the same need to revise the 2018 agreement as CSG does? > 2) If NCSG agrees that a revision is essential to avoid stalemate 3 > years from now, is NCSG agreeable to tying the 2 issues together? > 2023 Board Seat 14 selection and revised rules for nominations. > 3) The CSG's position regarding the 3rd term should be extended for > "extraordinary/exceptional performance" mirrors the standard used by > the NomCom.? We believe that NCPH should adhere to similar standards. > We had reservations about renewing Matthew 3 years ago and we still > do.? I explained them to you.? Mark brings strong experience in policy > with a balanced approach and an aim toward compromise.? He has built > strong relationships with NCSG and while you acknowledge Mark's > strengths, you have indicated that you may support him 3 years from > now but not now.? I think that needs to be more fully discussed. > Perhaps we can organize a call between our 2 excoms to sort this out? > We look forward to your responses to our questions. > With kind regards, > Lori S. Schulman > Senior Director, Internet Policy > International Trademark Association (INTA) > +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman > lschulman at inta.org , > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E,1 > ,gnOODaYbBtpLU9e65eMGothMEAXDSGtaMQabP7T5RGm2iwaS1gzG7CQy3JlN-QE8CGeG5 > aMYrLFKEz1nCnZvwNG2ZXRIwfvgQ3INynCc6A,,&typo=1 > ,uwIX8dF5KqK89VWG-58fA2UIAtvAdaWbdaF10VxqFebqvgtLH50U-_cjloCUNwFYH4200 > QbguY7ls85sYlX4dRyLeHMwJMbLh7BHoor534_h&typo=1> > -----Original Message----- > From: Johan Helsingius > > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 6:04 PM > To: Lori Schulman > > Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Dear > Lori, Yes, I did check, and according to them, the current board > member keeps his seat until a replacement is found. >? ??????? Julf > On 20/04/2023 17:56, Lori Schulman wrote: >> Dear Julf, >> >> Following up from my message,? I want also clarify that you were going to check with ICANN legal about the potential for stalemate and legal implications for ICANN.? is that right?? If so, have you heard anything.? If not, can you recall who made that offer to check with legal. >> >> Thank you again. >> >> With kind regards, >> >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org >, >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E , >> 1 > 1> >> ,eLHYiQmPLuIfqOOFUUAzZ6uoC4lE_f9egVim69bPwV0Qp8K2CRdG34GbkQyPvNpl6jzY >> F >> nHYbxrjdJOBC2tstgkB_Snp-dtk4itxSnEnaaXX&typo=1 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lori Schulman >> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 5:21 PM >> To: 'Johan Helsingius' > >>; > julf at julf.com > >> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org

> >> Subject: RE: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >> >> Dear Julf, >> >> Thank you for your patience with my recovery.? It has been a slog and with INTA's Annual Meeting in Singapore coming up, I have had to prioritize my health and my organization's meeting over anything else. >> >> We appreciate that you have nominated Rafik per the procedures of the >> 2018 agreement.? The CSG ExCom reserves our right to interview Rafik >> as we are trying to avoid a "battle of the candidates" at this >> juncture.?? I had asked a question about NCSG's? concerns over Mark's >> inability to "stand up to" Becky.? I had > mentioned that we do not feel that this is a criterion upon which we > agree.? We would like to discuss this with NCSG ExCom in further > detail as we have not witnessed the incumbent standing up to Becky > either...at least not in public.? Becky has obvious strengths as a > Board member but that should not be affecting our decisions about who > should be representing us.? We had a very productive meeting with our > Board incumbents last week and expect that all representatives have > reached a point where they have something to offer.?? We expect that > Mark will fit right in and are sticking with our support of his candidacy. >> >> That said, we believe that there is a bigger issue to be solved, that is the failure of the 2018 agreement to prevent another stalemate.?? The way the procedure works, we could become entangled in the "battle of candidates" indefinitely.? This wastes a lot of time and effort. >> >> I had drafted some proposed deal points that could potentially break >> stalemates in the future.??? I included them in one of our earlier >> messages but have not heard back on any of them.? The CSG has >> improved the draft since that first message and we are? finalizing a >> proposal that we hope the NCSG will consider.? The deal > benefits both sides of the house with each potentially having a > candidate in place for 9 years.?? Once we have approved it internally, > we will forward for NCSG's review and, hopefully, a full NCPH > discussion follow.? You can expect this proposal shortly.? I will > revert back with an exact date. >> >> Granting a 3rd term to a Board Member should be based on >> extraordinary performance.? Our sides of the house have not agreed on >> what the standards of that performance are.? That is a failure of >> governance and should be corrected.? We are aware that the? deadline >> is coming however, we would offer that we work out the long > term issues while continuing to discuss the pros and cons of the > current roster of Mark and Matthew.?? If we are truly stalemated, we > will interview others, starting with Rafik.? At that point, we would > offer another candidate too.? Let's use that as a last resort.? We > would rather miss the deadline and solve our longer term issues than > rush to reappoint the incumbent. >> >> We are aware that the NomCom may be affected by our decision in terms of geographic balance.? We are committed to not impeding the process for others.? However, we must make this choice in our own interests at an appropriate pace. >> >> With kind regards, >> >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org >, >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E , >> 1 > 1> >> ,Xk_rHz9qe1QbwE0imxE2ystoI7QxOoK2Ze_AMj1iBOinl3q_J1cnibYgeH0OjM9Vlpju >> c >> Eo0DKjPSaeGnTkOwJHj4Qwtzm4onBtcOtFayA,,&typo=1 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Johan Helsingius > >> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 9:33 AM >> To: Lori Schulman >> >> Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >> >> Just to be sure, also sent from my gmail address. >> >> >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:30:56 +0200 >> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> To: Lori Schulman >> >> CC: Cole, Mason (Perkins Coie) > >>, Tim Smith > >>, csg-excomm at icann.org > >

>>, >> Mohr, Susan >>, >> Brian King > >>, > philippe.fouquart at orange.com > >> >>, > NCSG EC >>, >> ncsg-pc >> >> >> Hi Lori, >> >> I hope you are fully recovered - long covid is a real hassle. >> >> Just wanted to check on where we are with board seat 14, as the deadline is getting very close. From what I hear there hasn't been any contact with Rafik for setting up an interview or asking questions. >> >> As you know, we still think Matthew is the best candidate, and considering how close we are to the deadline, I really think reappointing him for one more term is best option. >> >>??????? Julf >> From lschulman at inta.org Mon May 1 14:09:12 2023 From: lschulman at inta.org (Lori Schulman) Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 11:09:12 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: Hi Julf, Thank you for your response below. The CSG requests that NCSG agree to mediation on the selection of the Board Seat 14. We recommend engaging ICANN's staff mediator, Melissa Peters Allgood. It seems we have fundamental differences in 4 areas: ? understanding the criteria for Board member selection ? ability to assess Board member performance including the conditions regarding the renewal of a sitting Board member, ? importance of solving the persistent issue of stalemate; and ? setting clear priorities for NCPH Board members to represent interests across the House as appropriate We see the current 2018 agreement as unworkable with major gaps. Our priority is to correct it now. As stated before, we reserve the right to interview Rafik or suggesting any other new candidates. We disagree about the benefits of "being forced to work together" vis a vis the potential for deadlock. It needn't take an extraordinary amount of time if we commit to agree on our common interests and resolve the open issues described above. The time is better spent on resolving issues than entering indefinite rounds of candidate interviews. We strongly believe that professional mediation will help expedite the process. With kind regards, Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: LSSchulman lschulman at inta.org, www.inta.org -----Original Message----- From: Johan Helsingius Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2023 9:36 PM To: Lori Schulman Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 21:34:46 +0200 From: Johan Helsingius > To: Lori Schulman > CC: csg-excomm at ICANN.org

>, Mohr, Susan >, Tim Smith >, 'Brian King' >, MCole at perkinscoie.com >, philippe.fouquart at orange.com >, NCSG EC >, ncsg-pc > 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 previously explained your reservations with Matthew in general, listing them again, in detail, would help provide a clear and unambiguous understanding the objections that CSG has. This would also prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views 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 and experience - 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, and I hope you will respect the judgement of our EC and PC. 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 On 21/04/2023 19:46, Lori Schulman wrote: > Hi Julf, > Thank you for checking. I agree that we desperately need an > intersessional. When I say "incumbent/s". I mean current seat > holder/s without mentioning specific names. Before we organize one, I > have a few questions: > 1) Does NCSG see the same need to revise the 2018 agreement as CSG does? > 2) If NCSG agrees that a revision is essential to avoid stalemate 3 > years from now, is NCSG agreeable to tying the 2 issues together? > 2023 Board Seat 14 selection and revised rules for nominations. > 3) The CSG's position regarding the 3rd term should be extended for > "extraordinary/exceptional performance" mirrors the standard used by > the NomCom. We believe that NCPH should adhere to similar standards. > We had reservations about renewing Matthew 3 years ago and we still > do. I explained them to you. Mark brings strong experience in policy > with a balanced approach and an aim toward compromise. He has built > strong relationships with NCSG and while you acknowledge Mark's > strengths, you have indicated that you may support him 3 years from > now but not now. I think that needs to be more fully discussed. > Perhaps we can organize a call between our 2 excoms to sort this out? > We look forward to your responses to our questions. > With kind regards, > Lori S. Schulman > Senior Director, Internet Policy > International Trademark Association (INTA) > +1-202-704-0408, Skype: LSSchulman > lschulman at inta.org, > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E,1 > ,gnOODaYbBtpLU9e65eMGothMEAXDSGtaMQabP7T5RGm2iwaS1gzG7CQy3JlN-QE8CGeG5 > aMYrLFKEz1nCnZvwNG2ZXRIwfvgQ3INynCc6A,,&typo=1 > ,uwIX8dF5KqK89VWG-58fA2UIAtvAdaWbdaF10VxqFebqvgtLH50U-_cjloCUNwFYH4200 > QbguY7ls85sYlX4dRyLeHMwJMbLh7BHoor534_h&typo=1> > -----Original Message----- > From: Johan Helsingius > > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 6:04 PM > To: Lori Schulman > > Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Dear > Lori, Yes, I did check, and according to them, the current board > member keeps his seat until a replacement is found. > Julf > On 20/04/2023 17:56, Lori Schulman wrote: >> Dear Julf, >> >> Following up from my message, I want also clarify that you were going to check with ICANN legal about the potential for stalemate and legal implications for ICANN. is that right? If so, have you heard anything. If not, can you recall who made that offer to check with legal. >> >> Thank you again. >> >> With kind regards, >> >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org , >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E, >> 1 > 1> >> ,eLHYiQmPLuIfqOOFUUAzZ6uoC4lE_f9egVim69bPwV0Qp8K2CRdG34GbkQyPvNpl6jzY >> F >> nHYbxrjdJOBC2tstgkB_Snp-dtk4itxSnEnaaXX&typo=1 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lori Schulman >> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 5:21 PM >> To: 'Johan Helsingius' > >; > julf at julf.com >> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org

>> Subject: RE: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >> >> Dear Julf, >> >> Thank you for your patience with my recovery. It has been a slog and with INTA's Annual Meeting in Singapore coming up, I have had to prioritize my health and my organization's meeting over anything else. >> >> We appreciate that you have nominated Rafik per the procedures of the >> 2018 agreement. The CSG ExCom reserves our right to interview Rafik >> as we are trying to avoid a "battle of the candidates" at this >> juncture. I had asked a question about NCSG's concerns over Mark's >> inability to "stand up to" Becky. I had > mentioned that we do not feel that this is a criterion upon which we > agree. We would like to discuss this with NCSG ExCom in further > detail as we have not witnessed the incumbent standing up to Becky > either...at least not in public. Becky has obvious strengths as a > Board member but that should not be affecting our decisions about who > should be representing us. We had a very productive meeting with our > Board incumbents last week and expect that all representatives have > reached a point where they have something to offer. We expect that > Mark will fit right in and are sticking with our support of his candidacy. >> >> That said, we believe that there is a bigger issue to be solved, that is the failure of the 2018 agreement to prevent another stalemate. The way the procedure works, we could become entangled in the "battle of candidates" indefinitely. This wastes a lot of time and effort. >> >> I had drafted some proposed deal points that could potentially break >> stalemates in the future. I included them in one of our earlier >> messages but have not heard back on any of them. The CSG has >> improved the draft since that first message and we are finalizing a >> proposal that we hope the NCSG will consider. The deal > benefits both sides of the house with each potentially having a > candidate in place for 9 years. Once we have approved it internally, > we will forward for NCSG's review and, hopefully, a full NCPH > discussion follow. You can expect this proposal shortly. I will > revert back with an exact date. >> >> Granting a 3rd term to a Board Member should be based on >> extraordinary performance. Our sides of the house have not agreed on >> what the standards of that performance are. That is a failure of >> governance and should be corrected. We are aware that the deadline >> is coming however, we would offer that we work out the long > term issues while continuing to discuss the pros and cons of the > current roster of Mark and Matthew. If we are truly stalemated, we > will interview others, starting with Rafik. At that point, we would > offer another candidate too. Let's use that as a last resort. We > would rather miss the deadline and solve our longer term issues than > rush to reappoint the incumbent. >> >> We are aware that the NomCom may be affected by our decision in terms of geographic balance. We are committed to not impeding the process for others. However, we must make this choice in our own interests at an appropriate pace. >> >> With kind regards, >> >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org , >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E, >> 1 > 1> >> ,Xk_rHz9qe1QbwE0imxE2ystoI7QxOoK2Ze_AMj1iBOinl3q_J1cnibYgeH0OjM9Vlpju >> c >> Eo0DKjPSaeGnTkOwJHj4Qwtzm4onBtcOtFayA,,&typo=1 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Johan Helsingius > > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 9:33 AM >> To: Lori Schulman >> >> Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >> >> Just to be sure, also sent from my gmail address. >> >> >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:30:56 +0200 >> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> To: Lori Schulman >> >> CC: Cole, Mason (Perkins Coie) > >, Tim Smith > >, csg-excomm at icann.org >

>, >> Mohr, Susan >>, >> Brian King > >, > philippe.fouquart at orange.com >> >>, > NCSG EC >>, >> ncsg-pc >> >> >> Hi Lori, >> >> I hope you are fully recovered - long covid is a real hassle. >> >> Just wanted to check on where we are with board seat 14, as the deadline is getting very close. From what I hear there hasn't been any contact with Rafik for setting up an interview or asking questions. >> >> As you know, we still think Matthew is the best candidate, and considering how close we are to the deadline, I really think reappointing him for one more term is best option. >> >> Julf >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julf.helsingius at gmail.com Mon May 1 14:22:29 2023 From: julf.helsingius at gmail.com (Johan Helsingius) Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 13:22:29 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <0abbab8c-a9f7-da01-c69f-97239a7c5285@gmail.com> Hi Lori, Thank you for your response. We will discuss it and get back to you. Kind regards, Julf On 01/05/2023 13:09, Lori Schulman wrote: > Hi Julf, > Thank you for your response below.? The CSG requests that NCSG agree to > mediation on the selection of the Board Seat 14.? We recommend engaging > ICANN's staff mediator, Melissa Peters Allgood. > It seems we have fundamental differences in 4 areas: > > * understanding the criteria for Board member selection > * ability to assess Board member performance including the conditions > regarding the renewal of a sitting Board member, > * importance of solving the persistent issue of stalemate; and > * setting clear priorities for NCPH Board members to represent > interests across the House as appropriate > > We see the current 2018 agreement as unworkable with major gaps.? Our > priority is to correct it now.?? As stated before, we reserve the right > to interview Rafik or suggesting any other new candidates.? We disagree > about the benefits of "being forced to work together" vis a vis the > potential for deadlock. It needn't take an extraordinary amount of time > if we commit to agree on our common interests and resolve the open > issues described above. The time is better spent on resolving issues > than entering indefinite rounds of candidate interviews. We strongly > believe that professional mediation will help expedite the process. > With kind regards, > Lori S. Schulman > Senior Director, Internet Policy > International Trademark Association (INTA) > +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman > lschulman at inta.org, www.inta.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Johan Helsingius > Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2023 9:36 PM > To: Lori Schulman > Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline > Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 21:34:46 +0200 > From: Johan Helsingius > > To: Lori Schulman > > CC: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > >, Mohr, Susan > >, Tim Smith > >, 'Brian King' > >, > MCole at perkinscoie.com > >, > philippe.fouquart at orange.com > >, > NCSG EC >, ncsg-pc > > > 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 previously explained your reservations with Matthew in > general, listing them again, in detail, would help provide a clear and > unambiguous understanding the objections that CSG has. This would also > prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views 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 and experience - 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, and I hope you will respect the judgement of our EC > and PC. > 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 > On 21/04/2023 19:46, Lori Schulman wrote: >> Hi Julf, >> Thank you for checking.? I agree that we desperately need an >> intersessional.?? When I say "incumbent/s".? I mean current seat >> holder/s without mentioning specific names.? Before we organize one, I >> have a few questions: >> 1) Does NCSG see the same need to revise the 2018 agreement as CSG does? >> 2) If NCSG agrees that a revision is essential to avoid stalemate 3 >> years from now, is NCSG agreeable to tying the 2 issues together? >> 2023 Board Seat 14 selection and revised rules for nominations. >> 3) The CSG's position regarding the 3rd term should be extended for >> "extraordinary/exceptional performance" mirrors the standard used by >> the NomCom.? We believe that NCPH should adhere to similar standards. >> We had reservations about renewing Matthew 3 years ago and we still >> do.? I explained them to you.? Mark brings strong experience in policy >> with a balanced approach and an aim toward compromise.? He has built >> strong relationships with NCSG and while you acknowledge Mark's >> strengths, you have indicated that you may support him 3 years from >> now but not now.? I think that needs to be more fully discussed. >> Perhaps we can organize a call between our 2 excoms to sort this out? >> We look forward to your responses to our questions. >> With kind regards, >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org , >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E,1 > >> ,gnOODaYbBtpLU9e65eMGothMEAXDSGtaMQabP7T5RGm2iwaS1gzG7CQy3JlN-QE8CGeG5 >> aMYrLFKEz1nCnZvwNG2ZXRIwfvgQ3INynCc6A,,&typo=1 >> > ,uwIX8dF5KqK89VWG-58fA2UIAtvAdaWbdaF10VxqFebqvgtLH50U-_cjloCUNwFYH4200 >> QbguY7ls85sYlX4dRyLeHMwJMbLh7BHoor534_h&typo=1> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Johan Helsingius > >> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 6:04 PM >> To: Lori Schulman > >> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org >> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Dear >> Lori, Yes, I did check, and according to them, the current board >> member keeps his seat until a replacement is found. >>? ??????? Julf >> On 20/04/2023 17:56, Lori Schulman wrote: >>> Dear Julf, >>> >>> Following up from my message,? I want also clarify that you were going to check with ICANN legal about the potential for stalemate and legal implications for ICANN.? is that right?? If so, have you heard anything.? If not, can you recall who made that offer to check with legal. >>> >>> Thank you again. >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Lori S. Schulman >>> Senior Director, Internet Policy >>> International Trademark Association (INTA) >>> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >>> lschulman at inta.org > >, >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E > , >>> 1 >> > 1> >>> ,eLHYiQmPLuIfqOOFUUAzZ6uoC4lE_f9egVim69bPwV0Qp8K2CRdG34GbkQyPvNpl6jzY >>> F >>> nHYbxrjdJOBC2tstgkB_Snp-dtk4itxSnEnaaXX&typo=1 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Lori Schulman >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 5:21 PM >>> To: 'Johan Helsingius' >> >>; >> julf at julf.com > >>> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > > >>> Subject: RE: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> >>> Dear Julf, >>> >>> Thank you for your patience with my recovery.? It has been a slog and with INTA's Annual Meeting in Singapore coming up, I have had to prioritize my health and my organization's meeting over anything else. >>> >>> We appreciate that you have nominated Rafik per the procedures of the >>> 2018 agreement.? The CSG ExCom reserves our right to interview Rafik >>> as we are trying to avoid a "battle of the candidates" at this >>> juncture.?? I had asked a question about NCSG's? concerns over Mark's >>> inability to "stand up to" Becky.? I had >> mentioned that we do not feel that this is a criterion upon which we >> agree.? We would like to discuss this with NCSG ExCom in further >> detail as we have not witnessed the incumbent standing up to Becky >> either...at least not in public.? Becky has obvious strengths as a >> Board member but that should not be affecting our decisions about who >> should be representing us.? We had a very productive meeting with our >> Board incumbents last week and expect that all representatives have >> reached a point where they have something to offer.?? We expect that >> Mark will fit right in and are sticking with our support of his candidacy. >>> >>> That said, we believe that there is a bigger issue to be solved, that is the failure of the 2018 agreement to prevent another stalemate.?? The way the procedure works, we could become entangled in the "battle of candidates" indefinitely.? This wastes a lot of time and effort. >>> >>> I had drafted some proposed deal points that could potentially break >>> stalemates in the future.??? I included them in one of our earlier >>> messages but have not heard back on any of them.? The CSG has >>> improved the draft since that first message and we are? finalizing a >>> proposal that we hope the NCSG will consider.? The deal >> benefits both sides of the house with each potentially having a >> candidate in place for 9 years.?? Once we have approved it internally, >> we will forward for NCSG's review and, hopefully, a full NCPH >> discussion follow.? You can expect this proposal shortly.? I will >> revert back with an exact date. >>> >>> Granting a 3rd term to a Board Member should be based on >>> extraordinary performance.? Our sides of the house have not agreed on >>> what the standards of that performance are.? That is a failure of >>> governance and should be corrected.? We are aware that the? deadline >>> is coming however, we would offer that we work out the long >> term issues while continuing to discuss the pros and cons of the >> current roster of Mark and Matthew.?? If we are truly stalemated, we >> will interview others, starting with Rafik.? At that point, we would >> offer another candidate too.? Let's use that as a last resort.? We >> would rather miss the deadline and solve our longer term issues than >> rush to reappoint the incumbent. >>> >>> We are aware that the NomCom may be affected by our decision in terms of geographic balance.? We are committed to not impeding the process for others.? However, we must make this choice in our own interests at an appropriate pace. >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Lori S. Schulman >>> Senior Director, Internet Policy >>> International Trademark Association (INTA) >>> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >>> lschulman at inta.org > >, >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E > , >>> 1 >> > 1> >>> ,Xk_rHz9qe1QbwE0imxE2ystoI7QxOoK2Ze_AMj1iBOinl3q_J1cnibYgeH0OjM9Vlpju >>> c >>> Eo0DKjPSaeGnTkOwJHj4Qwtzm4onBtcOtFayA,,&typo=1 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 9:33 AM >>> To: Lori Schulman >> >>> Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> >>> Just to be sure, also sent from my gmail address. >>> >>> >>> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >>> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:30:56 +0200 >>> From: Johan Helsingius >> >>> To: Lori Schulman >> >>> CC: Cole, Mason (Perkins Coie) >> >>, Tim Smith > >> >>, > csg-excomm at icann.org >> > > > >>, >>> Mohr, Susan >>, >>> Brian King >> >>, >> philippe.fouquart at orange.com > > >>> >>, >> NCSG EC

>>, >>> ncsg-pc

Message-ID: <319fc011-96fb-6e1c-098a-605e26270014@Julf.com> Hi Lori, We are more than happy to agree to mediation on this year's selection of the Board Seat 14, and think Melissa is an excellent choice as mediator, but would like to discuss the parameters and deliverables of the mediation with Melissa first. I think the NCSG and CSG might have quite different criteria on Board member selection, performance and priorities, and I don't think it is fruitful to try to force them into a fixed common compromise. Instead the current arrangement encourages us to work together each time in a constructive fashion to find a working solution that best serves the need of both communities. Likewise we don't see the possibility of a stalemate as a major issue, as it encourages a constructive, cooperative approach where both CSG and NCSG engage in good faith, in the spirit of the ICANN multistakeholder environment, to find workable compromises. We spent a fair bit of time and effort doing just that when we worked out the 2018 agreement, that has now become the guiding document (as used by ICANN staff) for the Board seat 14 nomination process. We feel it should not be changed lightly, and we have dutifully respected and followed the process both CSG and NCSG agreed to. We kindly ask you to do the same. Meanwhile, as I requested in my previous email, listing your reservations with Matthew again, in detail, would help provide a clear and unambiguous understanding of the objections that CSG has. This would also prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views to our executive and policy teams. As to your suggested amendment to the current agreement, as you wrote, they would only apply from 2026 on, so we fortunately have 3 years to discuss them. This could start at the suggested intersessional. Kind regards, Julf On 01/05/2023 13:09, Lori Schulman wrote: > Hi Julf, > Thank you for your response below.? The CSG requests that NCSG agree to > mediation on the selection of the Board Seat 14.? We recommend engaging > ICANN's staff mediator, Melissa Peters Allgood. > It seems we have fundamental differences in 4 areas: > > * understanding the criteria for Board member selection > * ability to assess Board member performance including the conditions > regarding the renewal of a sitting Board member, > * importance of solving the persistent issue of stalemate; and > * setting clear priorities for NCPH Board members to represent > interests across the House as appropriate > > We see the current 2018 agreement as unworkable with major gaps.? Our > priority is to correct it now.?? As stated before, we reserve the right > to interview Rafik or suggesting any other new candidates.? We disagree > about the benefits of "being forced to work together" vis a vis the > potential for deadlock. It needn't take an extraordinary amount of time > if we commit to agree on our common interests and resolve the open > issues described above. The time is better spent on resolving issues > than entering indefinite rounds of candidate interviews. We strongly > believe that professional mediation will help expedite the process. > With kind regards, > Lori S. Schulman > Senior Director, Internet Policy > International Trademark Association (INTA) > +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman > lschulman at inta.org, www.inta.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Johan Helsingius > Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2023 9:36 PM > To: Lori Schulman > Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline > Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 21:34:46 +0200 > From: Johan Helsingius > > To: Lori Schulman > > CC: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > >, Mohr, Susan > >, Tim Smith > >, 'Brian King' > >, > MCole at perkinscoie.com > >, > philippe.fouquart at orange.com > >, > NCSG EC >, ncsg-pc > > > 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 previously explained your reservations with Matthew in > general, listing them again, in detail, would help provide a clear and > unambiguous understanding the objections that CSG has. This would also > prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views 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 and experience - 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, and I hope you will respect the judgement of our EC > and PC. > 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 > On 21/04/2023 19:46, Lori Schulman wrote: >> Hi Julf, >> Thank you for checking.? I agree that we desperately need an >> intersessional.?? When I say "incumbent/s".? I mean current seat >> holder/s without mentioning specific names.? Before we organize one, I >> have a few questions: >> 1) Does NCSG see the same need to revise the 2018 agreement as CSG does? >> 2) If NCSG agrees that a revision is essential to avoid stalemate 3 >> years from now, is NCSG agreeable to tying the 2 issues together? >> 2023 Board Seat 14 selection and revised rules for nominations. >> 3) The CSG's position regarding the 3rd term should be extended for >> "extraordinary/exceptional performance" mirrors the standard used by >> the NomCom.? We believe that NCPH should adhere to similar standards. >> We had reservations about renewing Matthew 3 years ago and we still >> do.? I explained them to you.? Mark brings strong experience in policy >> with a balanced approach and an aim toward compromise.? He has built >> strong relationships with NCSG and while you acknowledge Mark's >> strengths, you have indicated that you may support him 3 years from >> now but not now.? I think that needs to be more fully discussed. >> Perhaps we can organize a call between our 2 excoms to sort this out? >> We look forward to your responses to our questions. >> With kind regards, >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org , >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E,1 > >> ,gnOODaYbBtpLU9e65eMGothMEAXDSGtaMQabP7T5RGm2iwaS1gzG7CQy3JlN-QE8CGeG5 >> aMYrLFKEz1nCnZvwNG2ZXRIwfvgQ3INynCc6A,,&typo=1 >> > ,uwIX8dF5KqK89VWG-58fA2UIAtvAdaWbdaF10VxqFebqvgtLH50U-_cjloCUNwFYH4200 >> QbguY7ls85sYlX4dRyLeHMwJMbLh7BHoor534_h&typo=1> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Johan Helsingius > >> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 6:04 PM >> To: Lori Schulman > >> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org >> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Dear >> Lori, Yes, I did check, and according to them, the current board >> member keeps his seat until a replacement is found. >>? ??????? Julf >> On 20/04/2023 17:56, Lori Schulman wrote: >>> Dear Julf, >>> >>> Following up from my message,? I want also clarify that you were going to check with ICANN legal about the potential for stalemate and legal implications for ICANN.? is that right?? If so, have you heard anything.? If not, can you recall who made that offer to check with legal. >>> >>> Thank you again. >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Lori S. Schulman >>> Senior Director, Internet Policy >>> International Trademark Association (INTA) >>> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >>> lschulman at inta.org > >, >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E > , >>> 1 >> > 1> >>> ,eLHYiQmPLuIfqOOFUUAzZ6uoC4lE_f9egVim69bPwV0Qp8K2CRdG34GbkQyPvNpl6jzY >>> F >>> nHYbxrjdJOBC2tstgkB_Snp-dtk4itxSnEnaaXX&typo=1 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Lori Schulman >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 5:21 PM >>> To: 'Johan Helsingius' >> >>; >> julf at julf.com > >>> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > > >>> Subject: RE: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> >>> Dear Julf, >>> >>> Thank you for your patience with my recovery.? It has been a slog and with INTA's Annual Meeting in Singapore coming up, I have had to prioritize my health and my organization's meeting over anything else. >>> >>> We appreciate that you have nominated Rafik per the procedures of the >>> 2018 agreement.? The CSG ExCom reserves our right to interview Rafik >>> as we are trying to avoid a "battle of the candidates" at this >>> juncture.?? I had asked a question about NCSG's? concerns over Mark's >>> inability to "stand up to" Becky.? I had >> mentioned that we do not feel that this is a criterion upon which we >> agree.? We would like to discuss this with NCSG ExCom in further >> detail as we have not witnessed the incumbent standing up to Becky >> either...at least not in public.? Becky has obvious strengths as a >> Board member but that should not be affecting our decisions about who >> should be representing us.? We had a very productive meeting with our >> Board incumbents last week and expect that all representatives have >> reached a point where they have something to offer.?? We expect that >> Mark will fit right in and are sticking with our support of his candidacy. >>> >>> That said, we believe that there is a bigger issue to be solved, that is the failure of the 2018 agreement to prevent another stalemate.?? The way the procedure works, we could become entangled in the "battle of candidates" indefinitely.? This wastes a lot of time and effort. >>> >>> I had drafted some proposed deal points that could potentially break >>> stalemates in the future.??? I included them in one of our earlier >>> messages but have not heard back on any of them.? The CSG has >>> improved the draft since that first message and we are? finalizing a >>> proposal that we hope the NCSG will consider.? The deal >> benefits both sides of the house with each potentially having a >> candidate in place for 9 years.?? Once we have approved it internally, >> we will forward for NCSG's review and, hopefully, a full NCPH >> discussion follow.? You can expect this proposal shortly.? I will >> revert back with an exact date. >>> >>> Granting a 3rd term to a Board Member should be based on >>> extraordinary performance.? Our sides of the house have not agreed on >>> what the standards of that performance are.? That is a failure of >>> governance and should be corrected.? We are aware that the? deadline >>> is coming however, we would offer that we work out the long >> term issues while continuing to discuss the pros and cons of the >> current roster of Mark and Matthew.?? If we are truly stalemated, we >> will interview others, starting with Rafik.? At that point, we would >> offer another candidate too.? Let's use that as a last resort.? We >> would rather miss the deadline and solve our longer term issues than >> rush to reappoint the incumbent. >>> >>> We are aware that the NomCom may be affected by our decision in terms of geographic balance.? We are committed to not impeding the process for others.? However, we must make this choice in our own interests at an appropriate pace. >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Lori S. Schulman >>> Senior Director, Internet Policy >>> International Trademark Association (INTA) >>> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >>> lschulman at inta.org > >, >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E > , >>> 1 >> > 1> >>> ,Xk_rHz9qe1QbwE0imxE2ystoI7QxOoK2Ze_AMj1iBOinl3q_J1cnibYgeH0OjM9Vlpju >>> c >>> Eo0DKjPSaeGnTkOwJHj4Qwtzm4onBtcOtFayA,,&typo=1 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 9:33 AM >>> To: Lori Schulman >> >>> Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> >>> Just to be sure, also sent from my gmail address. >>> >>> >>> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >>> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:30:56 +0200 >>> From: Johan Helsingius >> >>> To: Lori Schulman >> >>> CC: Cole, Mason (Perkins Coie) >> >>, Tim Smith > >> >>, > csg-excomm at icann.org >> > > > >>, >>> Mohr, Susan >>, >>> Brian King >> >>, >> philippe.fouquart at orange.com > > >>> >>, >> NCSG EC

>>, >>> ncsg-pc

>> >>> >>> Hi Lori, >>> >>> I hope you are fully recovered - long covid is a real hassle. >>> >>> Just wanted to check on where we are with board seat 14, as the deadline is getting very close. From what I hear there hasn't been any contact with Rafik for setting up an interview or asking questions. >>> >>> As you know, we still think Matthew is the best candidate, and considering how close we are to the deadline, I really think reappointing him for one more term is best option. >>> >>>??????? Julf >>> From julf at Julf.com Thu May 4 16:09:43 2023 From: julf at Julf.com (Johan Helsingius) Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 15:09:43 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <42360c4f-0f40-d1a0-bd1b-2e6b7f65a093@Julf.com> FYI... -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: RE: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 12:59:42 +0000 From: Lori Schulman To: Johan Helsingius , csg-excomm at ICANN.org , 'Brian King' , MCole at perkinscoie.com , Tim Smith , Mohr, Susan , philippe.fouquart at orange.com CC: Melissa Allgood Hi Julf, We are very pleased to hear that NCSG will agree to mediation. We see this a positive step forward in building mutual trust and collaboration. Your response below is well noted. I am copying Melissa so she is aware that we will be seeking her assistance. As my organization's largest meeting is coming up next week in Singapore, I will be hard to reach between next Thursday and the end of the month. There may be others who are willing to step into my place while I am away. We will discuss that internally. I think that we certainly can negotiate the parameters of the mediation. That is sensible and fair. In in terms of memorializing our objections to Matthew, we have provided sufficient detail you and to Matthew. We are not inclined to write an email that could be misconstrued as a personal attack. This is not personal. An alternative solution may be to have a talk with you, Matthew and me at some point. This is not the time. As we indicated before, the 2018 agreement has significant flaws and the fact that we haven't had any intersessionals in years has made it difficult figure out what cooperation looks like. We are puzzled by your statement, "I think the NCSG and CSG might have quite different criteria on Board member selection, performance and priorities, and I don't think it is fruitful to try to force them into a fixed common compromise." Compromise is the end game and we have a fundamental disagreement that an indeterminate "battle of candidates" is, indeed, a constructive use of valuable volunteer time and effort. In terms of following the 2018 process, we have reserved the right to interview Rafik at a later time. We do have questions for him. However, we have a strong preference for reaching common criteria and understandings before we move on to more rounds of interview. We take the 2018 agreement quite seriously and this why we have highlighted what we believe to be fundamental flaws in its underlying premise. They should be corrected as soon as possible. My recommendation is that we reach out to Melissa to schedule a call sometime before next Thursday between the 3 of us and whoever will sit in for me while I am engaged with INTA's Annual Meeting in Singapore. We also recommend scheduling a face to face at ICANN77. I will contact Melissa under separate copy to set up a call. With kind regards, Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman lschulman at inta.org, www.inta.org -----Original Message----- From: Johan Helsingius Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 12:25 PM To: Lori Schulman Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline - Request for Mediation Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 12:24:04 +0200 From: Johan Helsingius To: Lori Schulman CC: NCSG-EC , ncsg-pc , csg-excomm at ICANN.org , 'Brian King' , Mohr, Susan , MCole at perkinscoie.com , Tim Smith , philippe.fouquart at orange.com , Melissa Peters Allgood Hi Lori, We are more than happy to agree to mediation on this year's selection of the Board Seat 14, and think Melissa is an excellent choice as mediator, but would like to discuss the parameters and deliverables of the mediation with Melissa first. I think the NCSG and CSG might have quite different criteria on Board member selection, performance and priorities, and I don't think it is fruitful to try to force them into a fixed common compromise. Instead the current arrangement encourages us to work together each time in a constructive fashion to find a working solution that best serves the need of both communities. Likewise we don't see the possibility of a stalemate as a major issue, as it encourages a constructive, cooperative approach where both CSG and NCSG engage in good faith, in the spirit of the ICANN multistakeholder environment, to find workable compromises. We spent a fair bit of time and effort doing just that when we worked out the 2018 agreement, that has now become the guiding document (as used by ICANN staff) for the Board seat 14 nomination process. We feel it should not be changed lightly, and we have dutifully respected and followed the process both CSG and NCSG agreed to. We kindly ask you to do the same. Meanwhile, as I requested in my previous email, listing your reservations with Matthew again, in detail, would help provide a clear and unambiguous understanding of the objections that CSG has. This would also prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views to our executive and policy teams. As to your suggested amendment to the current agreement, as you wrote, they would only apply from 2026 on, so we fortunately have 3 years to discuss them. This could start at the suggested intersessional. Kind regards, Julf On 01/05/2023 13:09, Lori Schulman wrote: > Hi Julf, > Thank you for your response below.? The CSG requests that NCSG agree > to mediation on the selection of the Board Seat 14.? We recommend > engaging ICANN's staff mediator, Melissa Peters Allgood. > It seems we have fundamental differences in 4 areas: > > * understanding the criteria for Board member selection > * ability to assess Board member performance including the conditions > regarding the renewal of a sitting Board member, > * importance of solving the persistent issue of stalemate; and > * setting clear priorities for NCPH Board members to represent > interests across the House as appropriate > > We see the current 2018 agreement as unworkable with major gaps.? Our > priority is to correct it now.?? As stated before, we reserve the > right to interview Rafik or suggesting any other new candidates.? We > disagree about the benefits of "being forced to work together" vis a > vis the potential for deadlock. It needn't take an extraordinary > amount of time if we commit to agree on our common interests and > resolve the open issues described above. The time is better spent on > resolving issues than entering indefinite rounds of candidate > interviews. We strongly believe that professional mediation will help expedite the process. > With kind regards, > Lori S. Schulman > Senior Director, Internet Policy > International Trademark Association (INTA) > +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman > lschulman at inta.org, > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E,1 > ,eGLjCjuMvEO91XbMiM9gaeP-0DEzl-Y3ZsVCqExB_fP-jDr5ervr8gCfgK0DQ44V8mbMX > 4jRq2g65jH1hy-xRDF4LJgjjpxNTBcWg7try7RmXhHFQYVIe1UGBw,,&typo=1 > ,ZhBrvN26IpiDYe0iBDxRhBTJEzV4TaXYT0SGQJKwG9MtL7cRgAr-7JCntJJcdl0xuTDkd > ATcbYKh28GDuhF5edi_BiXdtmiqG-j5nK1-4IeF4t2323wMpQ,,&typo=1> > -----Original Message----- > From: Johan Helsingius > Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2023 9:36 PM > To: Lori Schulman > Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline > Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 21:34:46 +0200 > From: Johan Helsingius > > To: Lori Schulman > > CC: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > >, Mohr, Susan > >, Tim Smith > >, 'Brian King' > >, > MCole at perkinscoie.com > >, > philippe.fouquart at orange.com > >, > NCSG EC >, > ncsg-pc > 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 previously explained your reservations with Matthew in > general, listing them again, in detail, would help provide a clear and > unambiguous understanding the objections that CSG has. This would also > prevent me misinterpreting or miscommunicating your views 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 and experience - 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, and I hope you will respect the judgement of > our EC and PC. > 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 > On 21/04/2023 19:46, Lori Schulman wrote: >> Hi Julf, >> Thank you for checking.? I agree that we desperately need an >> intersessional.?? When I say "incumbent/s".? I mean current seat >> holder/s without mentioning specific names.? Before we organize one, >> I have a few questions: >> 1) Does NCSG see the same need to revise the 2018 agreement as CSG does? >> 2) If NCSG agrees that a revision is essential to avoid stalemate 3 >> years from now, is NCSG agreeable to tying the 2 issues together? >> 2023 Board Seat 14 selection and revised rules for nominations. >> 3) The CSG's position regarding the 3rd term should be extended for >> "extraordinary/exceptional performance" mirrors the standard used by >> the NomCom.? We believe that NCPH should adhere to similar standards. >> We had reservations about renewing Matthew 3 years ago and we still >> do.? I explained them to you.? Mark brings strong experience in >> policy with a balanced approach and an aim toward compromise.? He has >> built strong relationships with NCSG and while you acknowledge Mark's >> strengths, you have indicated that you may support him 3 years from >> now but not now.? I think that needs to be more fully discussed. >> Perhaps we can organize a call between our 2 excoms to sort this out? >> We look forward to your responses to our questions. >> With kind regards, >> Lori S. Schulman >> Senior Director, Internet Policy >> International Trademark Association (INTA) >> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >> lschulman at inta.org , >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E, >> 1 > 1> >> >>,gnOODaYbBtpLU9e65eMGothMEAXDSGtaMQabP7T5RGm2iwaS1gzG7CQy3JlN-QE8CGeG5 >> aMYrLFKEz1nCnZvwNG2ZXRIwfvgQ3INynCc6A,,&typo=1 >> >>> >>,uwIX8dF5KqK89VWG-58fA2UIAtvAdaWbdaF10VxqFebqvgtLH50U-_cjloCUNwFYH4200 >> QbguY7ls85sYlX4dRyLeHMwJMbLh7BHoor534_h&typo=1> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 6:04 PM >> To: Lori Schulman > >> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org >> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline Dear >>Lori, Yes, I did check, and according to them, the current board >>member keeps his seat until a replacement is found. >>? ??????? Julf >> On 20/04/2023 17:56, Lori Schulman wrote: >>> Dear Julf, >>> >>> Following up from my message,? I want also clarify that you were going to check with ICANN legal about the potential for stalemate and legal implications for ICANN.? is that right?? If so, have you heard anything.? If not, can you recall who made that offer to check with legal. >>> >>> Thank you again. >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Lori S. Schulman >>> Senior Director, Internet Policy >>> International Trademark Association (INTA) >>> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >>> lschulman at inta.org > >, >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E > > , >>> 1 >> > , >> 1> >>> ,eLHYiQmPLuIfqOOFUUAzZ6uoC4lE_f9egVim69bPwV0Qp8K2CRdG34GbkQyPvNpl6jz >>> Y >>> F >>> nHYbxrjdJOBC2tstgkB_Snp-dtk4itxSnEnaaXX&typo=1 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Lori Schulman >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 5:21 PM >>> To: 'Johan Helsingius' >> >> >>; >> julf at julf.com > >>> Cc: csg-excomm at ICANN.org > > >>> Subject: RE: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> >>> Dear Julf, >>> >>> Thank you for your patience with my recovery.? It has been a slog and with INTA's Annual Meeting in Singapore coming up, I have had to prioritize my health and my organization's meeting over anything else. >>> >>> We appreciate that you have nominated Rafik per the procedures of >>> the >>> 2018 agreement.? The CSG ExCom reserves our right to interview Rafik >>> as we are trying to avoid a "battle of the candidates" at this >>> juncture.?? I had asked a question about NCSG's? concerns over >>> Mark's inability to "stand up to" Becky.? I had >> mentioned that we do not feel that this is a criterion upon which we >> agree.? We would like to discuss this with NCSG ExCom in further >> detail as we have not witnessed the incumbent standing up to Becky >> either...at least not in public.? Becky has obvious strengths as a >> Board member but that should not be affecting our decisions about who >> should be representing us.? We had a very productive meeting with our >> Board incumbents last week and expect that all representatives have >> reached a point where they have something to offer.?? We expect that >> Mark will fit right in and are sticking with our support of his candidacy. >>> >>> That said, we believe that there is a bigger issue to be solved, that is the failure of the 2018 agreement to prevent another stalemate.?? The way the procedure works, we could become entangled in the "battle of candidates" indefinitely.? This wastes a lot of time and effort. >>> >>> I had drafted some proposed deal points that could potentially break >>> stalemates in the future.??? I included them in one of our earlier >>> messages but have not heard back on any of them.? The CSG has >>> improved the draft since that first message and we are? finalizing a >>> proposal that we hope the NCSG will consider.? The deal >> benefits both sides of the house with each potentially having a >> candidate in place for 9 years.?? Once we have approved it >> internally, we will forward for NCSG's review and, hopefully, a full >> NCPH discussion follow.? You can expect this proposal shortly.? I >> will revert back with an exact date. >>> >>> Granting a 3rd term to a Board Member should be based on >>> extraordinary performance.? Our sides of the house have not agreed >>> on what the standards of that performance are.? That is a failure of >>> governance and should be corrected.? We are aware that the? deadline >>> is coming however, we would offer that we work out the long >> term issues while continuing to discuss the pros and cons of the >> current roster of Mark and Matthew.?? If we are truly stalemated, we >> will interview others, starting with Rafik.? At that point, we would >> offer another candidate too.? Let's use that as a last resort.? We >> would rather miss the deadline and solve our longer term issues than >> rush to reappoint the incumbent. >>> >>> We are aware that the NomCom may be affected by our decision in terms of geographic balance.? We are committed to not impeding the process for others.? However, we must make this choice in our own interests at an appropriate pace. >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Lori S. Schulman >>> Senior Director, Internet Policy >>> International Trademark Association (INTA) >>> +1-202-704-0408, Skype:? LSSchulman >>> lschulman at inta.org > >, >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.inta.org&c=E > > , >>> 1 >> > , >> 1> >>> ,Xk_rHz9qe1QbwE0imxE2ystoI7QxOoK2Ze_AMj1iBOinl3q_J1cnibYgeH0OjM9Vlpj >>> u >>> c >>> Eo0DKjPSaeGnTkOwJHj4Qwtzm4onBtcOtFayA,,&typo=1 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2023 9:33 AM >>> To: Lori Schulman >> >> >>> Subject: Fwd: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> >>> Just to be sure, also sent from my gmail address. >>> >>> >>> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >>> Subject: Re: Board Seat 14 Nomination Procedures and Timeline >>> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:30:56 +0200 >>> From: Johan Helsingius >> >> >>> To: Lori Schulman >> >> >>> CC: Cole, Mason (Perkins Coie) >> >>, Tim >>> Smith > >> >>, > csg-excomm at icann.org >> > > > >>, >>> Mohr, Susan >>, >>> Brian King >> >> >>, >> philippe.fouquart at orange.com > > >>> >>, >> NCSG EC

>>, >>> ncsg-pc