RE: [council] AoC Reveiw Team Re-do...

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Given that they are only considering endorsed candidates:

In this exclusive context I think the AC/SOs should only be vetting the
applications with the goal of making sure they are not just someone off
the street saying I want to represent the SO, but that they are/have
been involved in the SO and meet the requirements. If they do, they
should be *endorsed.* 

I think this is what Peter and Janis thought we were going to do. If
not, then why not just have us make the selection? 

In my opinion, if we do anything else we are not being fair to these
applicants. But if the Council insists on sticking with the current
process, SGs should be allowed to forward additional *endorsed*
applicants without Council interference and let Peter and Janis decide
how they want to deal with it.


Tim 
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [council] AoC Reveiw Team Re-do...
From: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, March 09, 2010 5:25 am
To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Gomes,Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 
KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx


Hi again,

On Mar 9, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:

> I haven't seen anyone question whether Janis and Peter have an
> understanding of the process. Clearly, they are only going to consider
> applicants we endorse. Of course, they had also thought we would be
> inclusive and endorse all that met the criteria, but of course that
> isn't what we're doing. 

Or what the other SO/ACs are doing. Indeed, if it were, there'd barely
be any reason for the SO/ACs to be involved at all. Anyone off the
street could apply direct to ICANN and say I want to represent the GNSO
or whomever. The whole point of the exercise was to vet a bit and try to
give them a bounded, workable slate of candidates we think are qualified
and that we support, as expressed in a vote by both houses. 

> What I am proposing is that each SG simply present a list of any number
> of the applicants that they endorse. Those are compiled by the Council
> and presented as candidates endorsed by this SG or that SG. The Council
> is not the GNSO, the SGs make up the GNSO and we represent them.

Ok so in this scenario, the GNSO sends the six it has selected and the
SGs in parallel send lists of people they endorse. The question then is
what is the status of the latter? Would Janis and Peter be free to pick
from that pool? If no, since all the applicant names will be known to
all already, presumably the purpose would be simply to let the Selectors
know what each SG's first choices would have been. If yes, this would
make the Council's endorsement of the six essentially irrelevant.
Wouldn't we need to pass a motion rescinding our previous decision to
choose the pool from which Janis and Peter can select GNSO
representatives? BTW, where would doing it this way leave independent,
unaffiliated candidates?

We are to talk about our endorsement process and any decisions (NCSG
should be able to announce its endorsements) in the open Council meeting
tomorrow. So if we are going to throw out everything we have done, we'd
best decide immediately. 

Thanks,

Bill