ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] NCAs in the new GNSO Council structure

  • To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] NCAs in the new GNSO Council structure
  • From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 23:03:54 -0300
  • Cc: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=P4PxZLkhAAMRfYaiyJxGjqdObIAHG90XkIPGkmlKK9M=; b=G+16Np0ejz72W1FfvHLj3NqeUuimbppnMpOk+EPGSPkE6aIhA/A5FMtt07JD93W3k4 lOCn3BbBxSsmQf8QiXjXCO4vP2RfBky7+Zp+X+foz5X+Utjjij+BEvY4bjK66+axOYHZ tE3gcyCK+PfRNdkybMXX2xAlAllwxCdw1x1KQ=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=lj1fuTt00tXYaF5e3QNfto2Gjk2wWVBvZ8Y8YIY6Ht6oAKuBleMgHB72jOcAe6cwvC 6z11AJmaSeVMYtyiW9WbpZb9h5qh9aMitdqcga1QDGcp4h2VBeDnQphVyJr8u9iWqKfa TzQ8N8nS0LCKvQklF9aqwam0kz6hL/2az8ssc=
  • In-reply-to: <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF0702D3F34A@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <bccbb21a0909041147p3bfd7e02jc7bc5b8444199e8@mail.gmail.com> <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF0702D3F34A@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Hi,
being an NCA, I would like to add my thoughts in relation to our role in the
new GNSO:


   -

   Option a:  The NCAs talk it through and figure out which roles seem right
   to them.

Could be a valid option, but one of the NCAs will be new in the council, so
he could hardly figure out which role to select.


   -

   Option b:  Random selection.

In my oppinon it brings no value in it.

>
>
>    -
>
>    Option c:  The council members decide with random selection of which
>    House chooses first.
>
> This is another version of the random selection.

>
>
>    -
>
>    Option d:  The two Houses collaborate and decide among them where the
>    NCAs will be assigned.
>
> This could be an option but perhaps it should add a possible refusal by the
NCA, in the case that he/she is not in favour of serving one of the houses
or becoming a homeless. What I want to say is that it sounds unfair just say
where NCAs go and not having any feedback about their expectations.

>
>
>    -
>
>    Option e:  The new, inexperienced NCA rep assumes the non-voting
>    Council seat and one of the above options is used to assign the two House
>    seats.
>
> It should not be for the two years, it takes out the stress to voting in
the first meetings, where there is a lot to read and sometimes it is hard to
decide.

The problem I see with this approach is that the fact of voting necesarily
pushes towards understanding, reading, asking, which at the beginning is
challenging and good for the future performance of the NCA in the council.
If you are new and you do not have to vote, then you do not have that
incentive and you may loose some momentum.


   -

   Option f:   The experienced NCA rep assumes the non-voting Coundil seat
   and one of the above options is used to assign the two House seats

There is value in active participation without voting, so this option could
be valid.

   -

   Option g: (Combination of option a and d) The two Houses collaborate and
   decide among them where the NCAs will be assigned, with a refusal option by
   any of the NCAs.

Regards to all.
Olga



2009/9/10 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

>  Several have expressed views on this.  It would be helpful if we could
> have more list discussion about the various options and any others anyone
> proposes in the next week.  Our plan is to make a decision on this along
> with the plan for seating Councilors in Seoul on 24 September.  Please get
> input from the groups you represent.
>
> Thanks, Chuck
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> *On Behalf Of *Olga Cavalli
> *Sent:* Friday, September 04, 2009 2:48 PM
> *To:* GNSO Council
> *Subject:* [council] NCAs in the new GNSO Council structure
>
> Hi,
> as discussed yesterday in the conference call, and to start the discussion
> in our list, I am including possible options for assigning the role of the
> three NCAs in the new structure of the GNSO Council:
>
> Option a:  The NCAs talk it through and figure out which roles seem right
> to them.
>
> Option b:  Random selection.
>
> Option c:  The council members decide with random selection of which
> House chooses first.
>
> Option d:  The two Houses collaborate and decide among them where the NCAs
> will be assigned.
>
> Option e:  The new, inexperienced NCA rep assumes the non-voting Council
> seat and one of the above options is used to assign the two House seats.
>
> Option f:   The experienced NCA rep assumes the non-voting Coundil seat and
> one of the above options is used to assign the two House seats
>
> Option g: (Combination of option a and d) The two Houses collaborate and
> decide among them where the NCAs will be assigned, with a refusal option by
> any of the NCAs.
>
> Please iclude other options thay you may think of and share your comments
> about this in the list.
>
> We should decide about this in our next GNSO conference call on 24
> September.
>
> Best regards
> Olga
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing.
www.south-ssig.com.ar


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>