RE: [council] NCA Assignments

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

I think it is unfortunate that the results of the random process were
communicated before our meeting.  I know we agreed on a plan but we
could decide to change the plan in today's meeting.  There seemed to be
strong support for seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House. In
my opinion, it would be preferrable to honor that support; I did not see
any objection to seating Terry there and both the RySG and CSG
communicated their support for that.

Assuming that I am correct, i.e., that there is support for seating
Terry in the Non-Contracted party house, and assuming that it is
desirable to minimize going against the NCA wishes as much as possible,
then we could change the decision process to one of the following, both
of which would seat Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House and then: 1)
seat Andrei in the non-voting Council seat as planned if there was not
consensus and Olga in the Contracted Party House; 2) apply a random
process for the remaining two seats.

It would have been better to consider this before knowing the results of
the random process but we could still change the process.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:12 AM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Not having heard, and proceeding to the final step,
> 
> >>
> >> d. 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.
> >
> > Note: If I need to do a random selection, I will use the 
> Wednesday 7 
> > Oct Powerball Lottery number 
> > (http://www.powerball.com/powerball/pb_numbers.asp
> > ) as seed to the  IETF RFC3797 random selection algorithm with the 
> > names ordered alphabetic by first name.; ie. Olga, Terry.  
> Doing so, 
> > however, will result in at least one of the NCAs being given an 
> > assignment that is contrary to their expressed interests.
> 
> The lottery number for yesterday was: 2 20 21 38 50
> 
> Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names are ordered:
> 
> 1. Olga
> 2. Terry
> 
> Also using alphabetical order for the assignments,
> 
> 1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name 
> picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
> 
> the RFC3797 program run (included below) picks #2 first
> 
> meaning:
> 
> Terry is assigned to Contracted
> Olga is assigned to Non Contracted
> Andrei, by motion, is non-voting Council seat.
> 
> a.
> 
> Run of the RFC3797 program
> 
> Type size of pool:
> (or 'exit' to exit) 2
> Type number of items to be selected:
> (or 'exit' to exit) 1
> Approximately 1.1 bits of entropy needed.
> 
> Type #1 randomness or 'end' followed by new line.
> Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 
> x.y format reals.
> 2 20 21 38 50
> 2 20 21 38 50
> Type #2 randomness or 'end' followed by new line.
> Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 
> x.y format reals.
> end
> Key is:
>   2.20.21.38.50./
> index        hex value of MD5        div  selected
>   1  EFC9E973E94E5D3BB70D8CDE6C0EDBCD   2  ->  2 <-
> 
> Done, type any character to exit.
> 
> 
> On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:05, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the 
> > subject of NCA assignment.
> >
> > I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people 
> have reached 
> > agreement.
> >
> > Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
> >
> > 1. Olga
> > 2. Terry
> >
> > Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
> >
> > 1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name 
> picked goes 
> > to Non Contracted Parties House
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > a.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Thanks Kristina.
> >>
> >> Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted 
> Parties House 
> >> to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei.  If they do, I assume 
> >> the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
> >>
> >> I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs 
> day's flight. 
> >> I will hold off running the random selection until I hear 
> back from 
> >> folks tomorrow.
> >>
> >> a.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
> >>
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise 
> >>> that Terry's preference to be assigned to the 
> Non-Contracted Parties 
> >>> House is acceptable to us.  I communicated this information 
> >>> yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue.  As no 
> other SG has 
> >>> yet posted any assignment-related information, we are 
> posting to the 
> >>> Council list in the hope of facilitating Council 
> completion of the 
> >>> assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
> >>>
> >>> K
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
>