Re: [council] Nominating Committee Draft Input
- To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Nominating Committee Draft Input
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 07:13:49 +0100
- In-reply-to: <D0A240F4.33B7Ffirstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <D0A240F4.33B7Femail@example.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
I am in somewhat of a quandary on this. I am not bothered by the Nomcom
- i do not think it hampers diversity. And while I understand that the
representation of business was lowered, the representation of non
commercials was not lowered and thus I object to indicating that the
proposal does so. The current representation of business on the nomcom
is disproportionate at this point and I support eliminating this double
representation of big and little business; this historical double
representation of the business constituency is not something I can
support. I strongly support bringing Nomcom support for the GNSO into
line with the SG model.
- i support equal footing in representation of the various SG, as well
- I so not see a problem with the representational model
But my SG may indeed be more in agreement with what is written than me,
I believe they may support the continued exclusion of the GAC as well.
The only thing that bothers me about the proposal is that they set out
to make the Nomcom smaller and they instead made it bigger.
I am uncomfortable at this point with calling the opinion unanimous,
and though I expect it has consensus we should wait to see if that is
indeed the case.
On 02-Dec-14 00:59, Marika Konings wrote:
> Dear All,
> On behalf of John Berard, please find attached a first draft of a
> possible GNSO Council response to the public comment forum on the
> Nominating Committee recommendations from the Board Working Group.
> Please note that further revisions may be made to this document in the
> next couple of days by the drafters, but in order to meet the document
> deadline, I am sending this to you now.
> Best regards,