RE: [ispcp] GNSO Council representation between now and Seoul

["Jaime Wagner" <jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I endorse it also.

 

Jaime Wagner
j@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

cel: (51)8126-0916

http://jaime-wagner.blogspot.com/

 

From: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Anthony Harris
Sent: quinta-feira, 20 de agosto de 2009 12:24
To: Tony Holmes; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ispcp] GNSO Council representation between now and Seoul

 

I support this approach.

 

Tony Harris

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Tony Holmes <mailto:tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  

To: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx 

Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 11:20 AM

Subject: [ispcp] GNSO Council representation between now and Seoul

 

Dear ISPCP members

I've been informed that due to changes within Verizon, Greg Ruth is no
longer able to represent the ISPCP on the GNSO Council. The timing is a
little unfortunate as Greg's term expired at the next meeting in Seoul
anyway. You'll also be aware that the Constituency will be holding elections
shortly in order to seat two new representatives on the new reformed GNSO
Council. 

Against that background we need to find a way forward between now and Seoul
in order to cover the two scheduled GNSO meetings before then and there are
a number of points that require careful consideration;

* All of those currently representing the ISPCP on the GNSO council will be
standing down at the Seoul meeting and will not be eligible to stand for
re-election, that means for the new Council we start with a completely new
slate of candidates 

* If we bring forward that election with the intention of covering Greg's
slot between now and Seoul it restricts those who can stand due to the
geographic diversity rule e.g it rules out all candidates from Latin America
and Europe as both Tony Harris and I are already on the Council. That hardly
seems fair. 

* If we bring forward an election, under the current ISPCP bylaws we cannot
conclude that process in time for the next GNSO call, therefore it would
only cover the one remaining teleconference/meeting. For the commercial
Stakeholder Group that is unacceptable as we would lose 1 vote on all
issues.

In order to overcome those problems, I would like to propose the following
way forward.

For the two remaining meetings Greg's place on Council should be taken by
Maggie Mansoukia. Most of you know Maggie from her attendance at ICANN
meetings over the years and both being employed by Verizon, Greg and Maggie
have always worked very closely on ICANN matters. Maggie has also actively
engaged in the ISPCP issues across the years (particularly on the WHOIS Task
Force where she represented the Constituency for many years) and is
therefore well placed to bridge this short gap. 

Before proposing this solution I did speak with Maggie and I'm pleased to
say that she would be willing to undertake this role if it is the will of
the Constituency. Therefore could I ask you to respond back if you would
support this approach. 

Please respond within the next 7 days and no response will be counted as 'no
objection to the proposed approach'.

I'd also like to take this opportunity on behalf of the Constituency to
thanks Greg for all his hard work over many years.

Regards

Tony