ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


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

RE: [council] FW: Organizational Reviews - 2 Applications for AoC Reviews - GNSO Endorsement -


I am fine with asking candidates to state any SGs or Constituencies in which 
they have membership, but I don't see why we need to assign candidates to SG's 
or constituencies.  Certainly, if SG's want to do that, they may do so.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
        Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 9:56 AM
        To: Council GNSO
        Subject: RE: [council] FW: Organizational Reviews - 2 Applications for 
AoC Reviews - GNSO Endorsement -
        
        
        I understand your point, Bill, but I think that, with one exception, 
allowing each applicant to decide which SG should consider his/her application 
will lead to gaming.  I think we should apply the following "rules".
         
        1. Applicant stated in her/his application that she/he is member of an 
SG or constituency.
         
            One SG/constituency membership --> assign to that SG/constituency
            More than one --> applicant must designate which one.
         
        2.  Applicant did not state in his/her application that she/he is 
member of an SG or constituency
         
            Councilor knowledge of membership in SG/constituency --> assign to 
that SG/constituency
            Councilor knowledge of membership in At Large --> assign to ALAC
            No membership in At Large or SG/constituency --> unaffiliated
         
________________________________

        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Drake
        Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 8:54 AM
        To: Gomes, Chuck
        Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; Council GNSO
        Subject: Re: [council] FW: Organizational Reviews - 2 Applications for 
AoC Reviews - GNSO Endorsement -
        
        

                Hi Chuck,  

                On Feb 16, 2010, at 1:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:


                                Either way, these early apps point to a tweak 
we should make 
                                

                                to the Proposed Process.  We don't presently 
say anything 
                                

                                about how apps will be allocated to the up to 
six slots.
                                


                        Chuck: Not sure I agree here.  My understanding is the 
following: 1) We say that the SGs decide who, if any, will be allocated to four 
slots; 2)the Council will decide on the other two slots.  Do you think we need 
to be more explicit about that?  
                        


                The process document reflects the state of the DT's discussion 
as of last Wednesday, at which point we'd sort of said ok we (DT/Council/ET) 
will figure out next how exactly the allocation of applications to slots will 
be done, and we're debating that in the DT now.  But here I'm trying to look at 
it from an applicant's point of view, and in that context I'm wondering if they 
wouldn't want more of a sense of what happens after they hit send. I know I've 
had communication with someone who's considering applying but would like more 
clarity.  Presumably we don't want to deter applications by fostering 
uncertainty, unless it's unavoidable.
                


                                Perhaps we don't need to specify all the gory 
details, but at 
                                

                                a minimum it would be helpful if the text asked 
applicants to 
                                

                                say which SG, if any, they'd like to be 
nominated by.  (If 
                                

                                having been asked they still give no preference 
the 
                                

                                Evaluation Team or Council-TBD--would have to 
make a 
                                

                                determination in accordance with a procedure 
still to be 
                                

                                settled and proposed by the DT).  In these 
cases we have a 
                                

                                CORE person and an IPR lawyer so maybe it's 
straightforward, 
                                

                                but maybe not...
                                


                        Chuck: I have several concerns about asking applicants 
to specify which slot they want: 1) It would require us to more carefully 
define the slots to applicants so they could make an informed decision and I 
don't think there is enough time for to do that or to answer questions that 
would arrise; 2) some applicants will likely choose a slot or slots for which 
we don't think they fit; 3) if we did ask applicants to choose a slot or slots, 
I think SGs and the Council for the two open slots should still have the option 
to endorse a candidate for a slot they didn't choose, so what would the 
advantage be of asking candidates to choose? 4) in general, I think asking 
candidates to choose slots adds complexity that we do not have time for without 
commensorate value.
                        


                Asking them to indicate if they see themselves as and wish to 
be endorsed by any particular SG would make their desires clearer and help us 
avoid doing something they object to, unless it can't be helped.  Let's say 
someone works for an entity that's nominally in SG x but is really into the 
issues and orientation of SG y, with which s/he collaborates closely and might 
expect stronger support than from SG x.  Simply asking which if any SG are you 
seeking the endorsement of would provide a clarifying default.  But of course, 
if ET and/or Council decides the candidate really does fit SG y rather than x, 
or should/not be treated as an unaffiliated person, ok, we need not be bound by 
his/her indication.

                I'm not going to hari kari if Council prefers to do it another 
way, but have come to think that it'd be nicer to candidates if we simply ask 
them if they have a preference, and that it might be useful in assessing 
applicants from folks with complex profiles.

                Cheers,

                BD


                        
                        


                                One other thought: would it perhaps make sense 
to post 
                                

                                complete applications to the web and then 
direct people to 
                                

                                them there, rather than emailing zip files 
around between the 
                                

                                secretariat, council, SG chairs, SG members, 
etc?  And beyond 
                                

                                the transactions costs issue, there's also a 
transparency 
                                

                                dimension-the apps should be accessible to the 
public, as 
                                

                                envisioned by ICANN's call.
                                


                        Chuck: Good idea.
                        
                        
                        


                                Best,
                                


                                BIll
                                


                                On Feb 15, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Glen de Saint Géry 
wrote:
                                



                                        Forwarded From: Alice Jansen
                                        



                                        Good morning,
                                        


                                        In line with Chuck Gomes' request (see 
below), you will 
                                        

                                find enclosed two endorsement applications for 
Affirmation of 
                                

                                Commitments reviews from candidates that 
indicated GNSO as their SO. 
                                


                                        Please note that although candidates 
have specified an 
                                        

                                order of preference for the reviews to be 
performed, both 
                                

                                selected the 'Accountability and Transparency' 
review which 
                                

                                Mr. Gomes stresses in his email.
                                


                                        The compressed folders attached to this 
email contain the 
                                        

                                applicants' CV and motivation letter.
                                


                                        The application deadline for the 
'Accountability and 
                                        

                                Transparency' review will expire on February 
the 22nd, 
                                

                                midnight UTC, but as you know the GNSO Council 
will have 
                                

                                until the 1st March to endorse the candidatures.
                                


                                        Best regards
                                        


                                        Alice
                                        


                                        Alice E. Jansen
                                        

                                        --------------------------
                                        

                                        ICANN
                                        

                                        Assistant, Organizational Reviews
                                        


                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                

                                        ----------
                                        


                                        From: Gomes, Chuck 
[mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
                                        

                                        Sent: Wednesday, 10 February, 2010 00:51
                                        

                                        To: Marco Lorenzoni
                                        

                                        Cc: gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
                                        

                                        Subject: GNSO Request
                                        


                                        Marco,
                                        


                                        The GNSO requests that applications 
received from 
                                        

                                volunteers for the Accountability and 
Transparency RT be 
                                

                                forwarded to the GNSO Secretariat as soon as 
possible after 
                                

                                receipt for distribution to the Council list, 
SGs and other 
                                

                                GNSO organization lists.  If applications are 
received prior 
                                

                                to finalization of the GNSO endorsement process 
on 18 
                                

                                February, it would be helpful if the applicants 
seeking GNSO 
                                

                                endorsement were informed that additional GNSO 
information 
                                

                                requirements will be identified on 18 February 
and will be 
                                

                                requested at that time along with the CV and 
motivation letter.
                                

                                        If there are any concerns with this, 
please let me know.
                                        


                                        Thanks for your assistance.
                                        


                                        Chuck Gomes
                                        

                                        <Eric Brunner-Williams.zip><Victoria 
McEvedy.zip>
                                        


                                
***********************************************************
                                

                                William J. Drake
                                

                                Senior Associate
                                

                                Centre for International Governance
                                

                                Graduate Institute of International and
                                

                                Development Studies
                                

                                Geneva, Switzerland
                                

                                william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                                

                                www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
                                

                                
***********************************************************
                                


                 



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