RE: [council] Appointment of NCA to Houses

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

Avri pointed out to me an email exchange she and I had on 11 October in
which she was confirming: "Unless there is a 4 way full consensus of the
SGs , the lottery results as announced on the 8th stand."  And I
answered yes.  Sorry for not remembering that.

Chuck  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 8:56 AM
> To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Appointment of NCA to Houses
> 
> 
> I have a point of clarification.  Did "negotiate to a common 
> acceptable position on the placement of the NCA appointees" 
> mean getting unanimous support from all SGs?  As it stands, 
> three of four SGs supported the alternative seating 
> arrangement proposed by the RySG.  That is very strong 
> support.  Are we going to let one SG block a solution that 
> has support from all other SGs?  I know that we do not yet 
> come under the new voting thresholds, but when we developed 
> those one of the objectives we tried to accomplish was to 
> minimize situations where one SG would have veto power by itself.
> 
> The idea of taking another week as I view it was to try to 
> come up with a seating plan that did a better job of honoring 
> the NCA wishes.  The RySG alternative proposal results in 
> honoring the original choices of two of the NCA's choices 
> compared to the random plan, which only honors one.  It seems 
> unwise to rule out a solution that has very strong support 
> and honors more of the NCA preferences strictly on procedural 
> or process grounds especially considering it was essentially 
> an ad hoc process and not a Bylaws or Council Rules defined process.
> 
> The RySG said that the random selection was acceptable but I 
> need to emphasize that there was strong preference for the 
> alternative solution that we proposed.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 3:33 AM
> > To: Council GNSO
> > Subject: [council] Appointment of NCA to Houses
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Since it does not appear that the 4 SGs managed to negotiate to a 
> > common acceptable position on the placement of the NCA 
> appointees, and 
> > given that a week has passed since the meeting and the decision to 
> > give the council a week to try and find another acceptable 
> solution to 
> > the lottery, I believe that we are now in the position of accepting 
> > the results of the lottery and allowing the 3 NCAs to start 
> > participating with their houses on the decisions concerning 
> candidates 
> > for the chair position.
> > 
> > Thus, the NCA are allocated according to the following list as 
> > determined by the lottery:
> > 
> > Terry Davis - Contracted Parties House Olga Cavalli - Non 
> Contracted 
> > Parties House Andrei Kolesnikov
> > - Non Voting Seat
> > 
> > I will be writing up the process followed and notifying the 
> Board and 
> > the Nomcom leadership of these results later today.
> > 
> > 
> > Thank you.
> > 
> > a.
> > 
> 
>