RE: [council] NCA input to House placement

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you very much Avri.  This is very helpful.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:32 AM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] NCA input to House placement
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This  note is to notify the council that I have worked with 
> the 3 NCAs of the new council and have come up with their 
> input to the council regarding their recommendation for 
> assigning NCA Council Seats as required by the second bullet. 
>  This was an action that needed to be completed by 30 September.
> 
> 
> As a reminder, the Transition plan approved at the last 
> meeting contains the following:
> 
> ----
> 
> > For the period starting on 28 October 2009 and continuing 
> only through 
> > the 2010 ICANN Annual Meeting, the following procedure will 
> be used to 
> > assign NCAs to Council seats:
> >
> >     * ICANN Staff should ensure that a Statement of 
> Interest is received 
> > from Andrey Kolesnikov and sent to the Council not later than 30 
> > September 2009.
> >
> >     * Not later than 30 September 2009, new and existing 
> NCAs will make 
> > best efforts to collaborate and provide their input to the GNSO 
> > Council regarding their recommendations for assigning NCA Council 
> > seats. Such input should include any seating assignments 
> that any of 
> > the NCAs would individually be uncomfortable taking along 
> with their 
> > reasons.
> >
> >     * Taking into consideration the input from the NCAs, if 
> any, both 
> > GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder 
> Groups should 
> > attempt to reach agreement on the seating for each of the 
> three NCAs 
> > for the first year of the new bicameral Council and communicate the 
> > results to the Council not later than 7 October 2009.
> >
> >     * If the GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective 
> Stakeholder 
> > Groups are unable to reach agreement, then the new, 
> inexperienced NCA 
> > will take the non-voting Council seat and random selection will be 
> > used to assign the other two NCAs to Houses before the 
> Council meeting 
> > on 8 October 2009.
> >
> >     * In the meeting scheduled for 8 October 2009, the Council will 
> > acknowledge the results of this process and confirm that it was 
> > properly conducted.
> >
> -----
> 
> In terms of the first point Glen is currently working with 
> Andrey to get the required SOI completed
> 
> In terms of the second point, we have recorded the output of 
> the NCAs and make the following recommendations as input to 
> further discussions:
> 
> Contracted Parties House - Andrey
> Non contracted Parties House - Terry
> Independent non-voting - Olga
> 
> The Process we followed:
> 
> - First I created a doodle where each of them could indicate 
> their preference.  This was one of the 'yes-green, 
> maybe-yellow, no-red'  
> doodles.
> 
> I set this up as hidden poll, so that consideration for each 
> other's choices would not stand in the way of each of them 
> stating, in the first instance, their personal preference.
> 
> The idea was that once we saw the individual preferences, 
> they could then negotiate a final list based on knowing what 
> each other really wanted, or was willing, to do.
> 
> I also made myself available for any of them who wanted to 
> get more background information, but no one took me up on the offer.
> 
> Note: I also told them that if they hated the idea of the 
> poll we could start in another way, but I was looking for a 
> way to reach a conclusion quickly.
> 
> - The individual preferences, a snapshot of which is included 
> below, showed that there was one possible solution from the 
> beginning which would avoid any of them having to take a 
> position they did not want.
> 
> The results (depicted below):
> 
> Olga and Andrey were both interested in the Contracted Parties House
> 
> All three of them were willing to be placed in the 
> Non-Contracted parties house.
> Terry indicated he was only willing to be placed the 
> Non-contracted parties house
> 
> Olga was the only one indicating willingness to take the 
> Independent non voting role
> 
> I suggested this as a starting position for their 
> discussions, but also suggested they could ignore it, if they desired.
> 
> - In the following conversation they all accepted the 
> proposal, each for his/her own reasons:
> 
> Andrey felt that his experience in managing a zone with 2.3 M 
> domains, which is 99% compatible to a .COM environment, made 
> him feel comfortable going into the Contracted Parties house.
> 
> Terry felt that based on his experience in industry the Non 
> Contracted parties house was the most appropriate.
> 
> Olga was willing to take any of the roles, though she had a 
> preference for the Contracted parties.
> 
> - It is now up to the houses, to decide if they are willing 
> to accept the input of the NCAs.  If not, they will need to 
> come up with another proposal.
> 
> I invite the NCA's to add any comments to this they feel 
> would be useful to the Houses in making their decision, but 
> am not in any way obliging them to do so.
> 
> I should mention that Andrey has been added to this list (as 
> all newly appointed/elected council members will be), and I 
> welcome him.  Of course the incoming council members are 
> observers on the list until 28 October.  In keep with our 
> normal processes, I invite the new council members to 
> participate on the list as fully as they feel ready to with 
> voting and the making of motions being the only exceptions.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> a.
> 
>