Re: [council] Appointment of NCA to Houses
Thanks for that clarification Andrei. Stéphane Le 15/10/09 23:34, « Andrei Kolesnikov » <andrei@xxxxxxxx> a écrit : > > I should copy / paste Terry's statement. > >>>> Olga and Andrey were both interested in the Contracted Parties House > > I was, but follow any Council verdict with pleasure. This is a short version > of what I said during the call. > > See you, > > --andrei > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner- >> council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stephane Van Gelder >> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:17 PM >> To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'William Drake' >> Cc: 'Council GNSO' >> Subject: Re: [council] Appointment of NCA to Houses >> >> Thanks Terry, that is very helpful. >> >> Stéphane >> >> >> Le 15/10/09 18:42, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a >> écrit : >> >>> >>> Stephane >>> >>> Just for clarity, on this which I should have clarified earlier: >>>> Terry indicated he was only willing to be placed the Non-contracted >>>> parties house >>> >>> That was my preference (most interested in), I was (and am) more than >>> willing take whichever position the Council selected me for. >>> >>> See you in Seoul. >>> >>> Take care >>> Terry >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner- >> council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On >>> Behalf Of William Drake >>> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 8:58 AM >>> To: Stéphane Van Gelder >>> Cc: Council GNSO >>> Subject: Re: [council] Appointment of NCA to Houses >>> >>> >>> Hi Stéphane, >>> >>> The agreed process has played out and there's not much to be gained >> by >>> challenging each other's preferences, or the value of consensus >>> processes. However, I would simply like to understand FMI what >> you're >>> saying here. May I pose four questions, please: >>> >>> On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:34 PM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote: >>> >>>> This means that, despite the overall support of the SGs for a >>>> solution which >>>> was also inline with what the NCAs wanted themselves, we opt for the >>>> solution that suits only one SG. Hardly seems fair. >>>> >>>> I really think we should try and honour the NCAs' wishes if we can, >>>> and the >>>> proposed option 1 did that. >>> >>> First, the NCA's wishes, as recounted by Avri on Sept. 29, were as >>> follows: >>> >>>> >>>> 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 >>> >>> So Olga was willing to take any of the three, and made clear on the >>> last council call that she'd be perfectly happy with non-contracted. >>> And under the RySG option 1, Andrei was to be given the non-voting >>> seat, which he clearly did not want. So on what basis can it be said >>> that RySG option 1 was uniquely in line with the NCAs' wishes? >>> >>> Second, if satisfying the NCAs was your overarching concern (and >>> again, your preferred solution did not in fact do this), then why did >>> the RrSG wait from Sept. 29 to Oct. 14 to express a preference? You >>> had two full weeks to take a stand for that principle, but said >>> nothing until after NCSG stated the horridly unjust view that we >>> should do what we agreed to do. >>> >>> Third, since you're running for chair, I'd much appreciate it if you >>> could share your views on whether, as a general matter, the council >> is >>> obliged to abide by the rules and procedures it agrees for itself. >>> Are these binding, or can they be tossed aside or worked around (e.g. >>> through external lobbying) whenever they prove inconvenient to >> someone? >>> >>> Fourth, in terms of substantive outcomes, do you feel it would have >>> been much better signaling to the ICANN community and the larger >> world >>> if all three candidates for chair had been from the contracted house? >>> >>> Sorry to be slow, I'm just trying to understand your thinking. >>> >>> Thanks much, >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> >>> > > Attachment:
smime.p7s
|