Hi Peter, I have included as many of your suggested changes as possible. Included the updated Guideline Please note section 7.1 is not adjusted. It for discussion during the Council meeting. It was included following the experience with the latest Board nomination process. I added notes to the other points in your email. Kind regards, Bart -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Eligibility to participate in the selection process 4.1. Eligibility to be selected as a ccNSO Councillor by ccNSO Members This reads circular to me: eligibility derives from the result of the selection. I think what we are trying to say is that anyone is eligible, in particular no relation to any ccTLD is necessary (other than getting nomination, support, and employer approval (see below).
BB Comment - Adjusted
4.2. Eligibility to Nominate and Second Only Representatives of ccTLD managers whose ccNSO membership has been approved no later than one day before the start of the Call for Nominations are eligible to nominate or second a candidate. This means that the ccNSO Council must have approved the membership application by that time.
I suggest to remove the last sentence, it duplicates the first. Maybe change "has been approved" to "has been approved by the ccNSO Council" there. Don't we have a "member in good standing" clause? BB Comment Adjusted
4.3. Eligibility to Vote Only Emissaries of ccTLD Managers whose ccNSO membership has been approved no later than one day before the start of the call for Nominations, are eligible to vote for a candidate from their respective region. This means that the ccNSO Council must have approved their ccNSO membership application by that time.
Bb Comment: Adjusted The Bylaws define Emissaries of Territories, not ccTLD Managers, and they task the ccTLD Managers in a territory with identifying the Emissary. I do think that this clause does not aim at the Emissary, but at the proper membership of at least one ccTLD from the Territory. BB Comment: not adjusted, it focusing at both.
5 5. Selection Process Timeline The Council shall appoint the Selection Process Manager and establish the Council Selection Process timeline. When determining the timeline, the Council should consider the following factors: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Appointment of the Selection Process Manager. Nomination period: The Nomination Period will last for 3 weeks. Nomination Acceptance Period: This period will last for 1 week.
Since the intro says "should", I wonder whether these fixed time spans might better be, say, "at least 3 weeks" or "at least/most one week". BB Comment: adjusted
6. Call for Nominations 6.1. Nomination Process
Basing this on the Representative rather than the Emissary is consistent with the general logic, but it would allow for multiple nominees even from the same territory. I'd suggest we add a note of discouragement here (see below). BB Comment: this is more a matter for communication
7 ● ● Employer's Letter of Support (from the ccTLD or another relevant organization), which must include an acknowledgment of the time commitment required.
Maybe we could be more explicit about the role of this letter, especially if the employer is not a ccTLD/not a ccNSO member. It is about time commitment, but maybe also about travel commitment and the role of the councillor? BB Comment: thanks for the suggestion it is more a matter of FAQ/communication
Nominees must also submit their Statement of Interest.
I'd assume that this would also cover self-employed or not employed nominees, i.e., no employer letter possible/necessary. Introducing a "no more than one Councillor per employer" rule comes to mind, as well. BB Comment: No hard and fast rule
The nomination will be considered invalid if the Nomination Acceptance Form or any required documentation is not submitted by the end of the Nomination Acceptance Period. After the Nomination Acceptance Period is closed, the Selection Process Manager will publish a list of Candidates, along with records of the nominations and acceptances, on the ccNSO website. 6.2.1. Nomination Acceptance Form The Nomination Acceptance Form will include the following items: ● ● ● Nominee’s Full Name Nominee’s Affiliation Acceptance of the ccNSO Council Selection Guideline and ccNSO Rules, including the Council Removal Mechanism, as well as a commitment to keep the Statement of Interest up to date ● Acceptance of the ICANN Privacy Policy and ICANN website Terms and Conditions
7. Voting 7.1. Voting Process If there is only one (1) Candidate in an ICANN Geographic Region, that Candidate will be selected to serve on the Council. If there are two or more Candidates for the same ICANN Geographic Region, the selection will be made through a voting, following the timeline specified in Section 5 of this Guideline and the procedures outlined in Section 7. Voting will be conducted by Emissaries, who will select their preferred candidate on the ballot. The candidate receiving the most votes (plurality) will be declared the Councillor-elect. If two or more Candidates receive an equal number of votes, a run-off vote will be held between those candidates.
Maybe we should se an instant-run-off voting scheme?
During the voting process, a list of Territories participating in the selection process and their respective ICANN Geographic Regions may be published, indicating which ones have already voted.
I strongly object to this clause for the risk of undue influence on the election! BB Comment: Duly noted , for discussion on the Council meeting See experience Board consultations
9. Change of Affiliation Candidates and Councillors are required to maintain an up-to-date Statement of Interest (SoI), which includes their current affiliation. By submitting the SoI, they commit to updating it as needed. A Candidate or Councillor-elect who changes affiliation must inform the Chair of the Council. Upon such notification, the individual is deemed to have withdrawn from candidacy or from serving as a Councillor-elect. A Councillor serving on Council who changes affiliation during their term must notify the Chair of the Council. If the Chair is the one changing affiliation, the Vice-Chair(s) must be notified instead. The Councillor may continue to serve the remainder of their term unless one or both of the following conditions apply: ● At least 33% of the ccNSO members from the relevant ICANN Geographic Region object to the Councillor’s continued service.
This should be a third of the territories represented from that region, given that the description below rightfully involves teh Emissaries rather than the Representatives. BB Comment: adjusted as suggested.
● The new employer objects to the Councillor’s continued service on the Council. To assess whether the Councillor can continue: ● Within one week of receiving the notification, the Chair or Vice-Chair(s) shall instruct the ccNSO Secretariat to consult the Emissaries from the relevant ICANN Geographic Region. ● Emissaries will be asked whether they support or object to the Councillor continuing to serve after the change of affiliation. ● Simultaneously, the Councillor is expected to obtain at least a statement of non-objection from their new employer within the same one-week period.
Here the purpose of the letter (see above) becomes very relevant: in particular a non-cc employer should understand the role of the Councillor, so "non-objection" might be a bit weak. BB Comment: Suggest to include in a FAQ. AS to non-objection, the alternative would be explicit support. To capture the situation that a new employer is neutral, the term non-objection is used. I also observe that the previous employer, which might be a ccNSO member, will not be consulted for continued or discontinued support. It is my understanding that this is a change from previous practice, but it makes sense to me - still depending on what the nature of "support" is. BB Comment: The GRC suggested the change after long consideration, including factor that if a ccTLD is former employee, this ccTLD will also participate in general process. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------