RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Barrack, Thank you very much for your comment! I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account: 1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!! 2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations. 3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache. Thanks! Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Katrina, I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation. Regards On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Dear Katrina and all, I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community. But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from**the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable. One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation. Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table. Best, Andrés Piazza General Manager LACTLD El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Hi Everyone, Thanks for the interesting discussions! I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members? Regs, Peter From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Andres Piazza Sent: 01 June 2016 15:01 To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Dear Katrina and all, I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community. But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates not from the same region. I am sure this is something achievable. One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation. Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table. Best, Andrés Piazza General Manager LACTLD El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió: Hi Barrack, Thank you very much for your comment! I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account: 1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!! 2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations. 3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache. Thanks! Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv><mailto:katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Katrina, I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation. Regards On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv><mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote: Dear All, Thanks for all your comments! To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions. VOTING: Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course). The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August! SELECTION: In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates. DIVERSITY: We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position. Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity. However, this might not be enough. Your thoughts? Kind regards, ]{atrina -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Peter Individuals cannot be ccNSO members, only ccTLD manager organisation. This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD). I would say it is open to all individuals with relevant experience and expertise to apply. But obviously, those who play a significant role in a ccTLD, and, particularly those who work for a ccNSO member have an advantage in that we are more likely to know them. On 01/06/16 14:11, Peter Van Roste wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the interesting discussions!
I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members?
Regs,
Peter
*From:*owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Andres Piazza *Sent:* 01 June 2016 15:01 *To:* Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> *Cc:* ccnso-council@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Katrina and all,
I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community.
But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable.
One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation.
Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table.
Best,
Andrés Piazza
General Manager
LACTLD
El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>
Cc:ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and
questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please
note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of
candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by
full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to
apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the
sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree
that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council.
Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie
also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into
account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a
quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in
their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these
requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the
CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be
considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the
members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same
region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully
will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2
candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that
this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
ccNSO membership is not required, of course. ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:17 PM To: Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org> Cc: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Peter Individuals cannot be ccNSO members, only ccTLD manager organisation. This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD). I would say it is open to all individuals with relevant experience and expertise to apply. But obviously, those who play a significant role in a ccTLD, and, particularly those who work for a ccNSO member have an advantage in that we are more likely to know them. On 01/06/16 14:11, Peter Van Roste wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the interesting discussions!
I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members?
Regs,
Peter
*From:*owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Andres Piazza *Sent:* 01 June 2016 15:01 *To:* Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> *Cc:* ccnso-council@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Katrina and all,
I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community.
But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable.
One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation.
Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table.
Best,
Andrés Piazza
General Manager
LACTLD
El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>
Cc:ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and
questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please
note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of
candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by
full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to
apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the
sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree
that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council.
Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie
also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into
account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a
quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in
their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these
requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the
CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be
considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the
members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same
region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully
will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2
candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that
this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Hi Nigel, Thanks for the feedback! However: _" This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD)."_ I don't agree with this conclusion. I think we should at least discuss if appointment can't and shouldn't be made conditional upon the appointee's continuing engagement with/working for a ccTLD manager. So that in the case you mention, when someone leaves his/her employment it will be up to the Council to decide if the person can still sit in the CSC on behalf of our community. An extreme illustration would be a scenario where we appoint X and a few months later X starts working for ICANN. Regards, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: 01 June 2016 15:17 To: Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org> Cc: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Peter Individuals cannot be ccNSO members, only ccTLD manager organisation. This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD). I would say it is open to all individuals with relevant experience and expertise to apply. But obviously, those who play a significant role in a ccTLD, and, particularly those who work for a ccNSO member have an advantage in that we are more likely to know them. On 01/06/16 14:11, Peter Van Roste wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the interesting discussions!
I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members?
Regs,
Peter
*From:*owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Andres Piazza *Sent:* 01 June 2016 15:01 *To:* Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> *Cc:* ccnso-council@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Katrina and all,
I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community.
But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable.
One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation.
Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table.
Best,
Andrés Piazza
General Manager
LACTLD
El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>
Cc:ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and
questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please
note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of
candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by
full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to
apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the
sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree
that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council.
Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie
also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into
account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a
quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in
their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these
requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the
CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be
considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the
members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same
region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully
will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2
candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that
this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Hi Peter, A very valid concern! According to the guideline the GRC is working on, the ccNSO Council may recall a CSC member at any time. There will be a mechanism to deal with situations you just described. Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Peter Van Roste [mailto:peter@centr.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:47 PM To: Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net> Cc: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Nigel, Thanks for the feedback! However: _" This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD)."_ I don't agree with this conclusion. I think we should at least discuss if appointment can't and shouldn't be made conditional upon the appointee's continuing engagement with/working for a ccTLD manager. So that in the case you mention, when someone leaves his/her employment it will be up to the Council to decide if the person can still sit in the CSC on behalf of our community. An extreme illustration would be a scenario where we appoint X and a few months later X starts working for ICANN. Regards, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: 01 June 2016 15:17 To: Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org> Cc: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Peter Individuals cannot be ccNSO members, only ccTLD manager organisation. This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD). I would say it is open to all individuals with relevant experience and expertise to apply. But obviously, those who play a significant role in a ccTLD, and, particularly those who work for a ccNSO member have an advantage in that we are more likely to know them. On 01/06/16 14:11, Peter Van Roste wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the interesting discussions!
I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members?
Regs,
Peter
*From:*owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Andres Piazza *Sent:* 01 June 2016 15:01 *To:* Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> *Cc:* ccnso-council@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Katrina and all,
I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community.
But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable.
One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation.
Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table.
Best,
Andrés Piazza
General Manager
LACTLD
El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>
Cc:ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and
questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please
note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of
candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by
full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to
apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the
sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree
that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council.
Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie
also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into
account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a
quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in
their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these
requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the
CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be
considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the
members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same
region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully
will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2
candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that
this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
I shared that concern. Good to know. a. El 1/6/16 a las 11:18, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Peter,
A very valid concern! According to the guideline the GRC is working on, the ccNSO Council may recall a CSC member at any time. There will be a mechanism to deal with situations you just described.
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message----- From: Peter Van Roste [mailto:peter@centr.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:47 PM To: Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net> Cc: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Nigel,
Thanks for the feedback!
However: _" This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD)."_
I don't agree with this conclusion. I think we should at least discuss if appointment can't and shouldn't be made conditional upon the appointee's continuing engagement with/working for a ccTLD manager. So that in the case you mention, when someone leaves his/her employment it will be up to the Council to decide if the person can still sit in the CSC on behalf of our community. An extreme illustration would be a scenario where we appoint X and a few months later X starts working for ICANN.
Regards, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: 01 June 2016 15:17 To: Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org> Cc: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Peter
Individuals cannot be ccNSO members, only ccTLD manager organisation.
This means that members of the CSC are appointed in an individual capacity, and once appointed, remain there, even if they no longer have any association with a ccTLD, never mind any assocaition with a ccNSO member (such as Lesley remain on Council when no longer being employed by a ccTLD).
I would say it is open to all individuals with relevant experience and expertise to apply. But obviously, those who play a significant role in a ccTLD, and, particularly those who work for a ccNSO member have an advantage in that we are more likely to know them.
On 01/06/16 14:11, Peter Van Roste wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the interesting discussions!
I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members?
Regs,
Peter
*From:*owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Andres Piazza *Sent:* 01 June 2016 15:01 *To:* Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> *Cc:* ccnso-council@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Katrina and all,
I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community.
But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable.
One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation.
Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table.
Best,
Andrés Piazza
General Manager
LACTLD
El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>
Cc:ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki<katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and
questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please
note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of
candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by
full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to
apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the
sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree
that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council.
Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie
also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into
account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a
quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in
their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these
requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the
CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be
considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the
members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same
region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully
will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2
candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that
this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Peter, I think restricting CSC membership to people drawn from ccNSO member ccTLD Registries would be a big error. To do so would be to suggest that it's OK for the IANA to provide two levels of service --one for ccNSO member Registries, and another for non-ccNSO member Registries. And besides, by excluding consideration of the potential talent pool that no doubt exists in non ccNSO member ccTLD Registries, we will deprive the Community of that potential talent. Best, /Stephen From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Peter Van Roste Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 9:11 AM To: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Everyone, Thanks for the interesting discussions! I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members? Regs, Peter From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org> [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Andres Piazza Sent: 01 June 2016 15:01 To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> >; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com <mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com> > Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Dear Katrina and all, I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community. But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates not from the same region. I am sure this is something achievable. One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation. Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table. Best, Andrés Piazza General Manager LACTLD El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió: Hi Barrack, Thank you very much for your comment! I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account: 1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!! 2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations. 3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache. Thanks! Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Katrina, I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation. Regards On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> <katrina@nic.lv> wrote: Dear All, Thanks for all your comments! To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions. VOTING: Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course). The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August! SELECTION: In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates. DIVERSITY: We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position. Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity. However, this might not be enough. Your thoughts? Kind regards, ]{atrina -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Hi Stephen, I fully agree. I believe it important that the appointees work for a ccTLD and give regular feedback, whether they are from ccNSO member registries or non ccNSO member ccTLD registries. Peter From: Stephen Deerhake [mailto:sdeerhake@nic.as] Sent: 01 June 2016 15:51 To: Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org>; Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Peter, I think restricting CSC membership to people drawn from ccNSO member ccTLD Registries would be a big error. To do so would be to suggest that it's OK for the IANA to provide two levels of service --one for ccNSO member Registries, and another for non-ccNSO member Registries. And besides, by excluding consideration of the potential talent pool that no doubt exists in non ccNSO member ccTLD Registries, we will deprive the Community of that potential talent. Best, /Stephen From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org<mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org> [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Peter Van Roste Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 9:11 AM To: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org<mailto:andres@lactld.org>>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv<mailto:katrina@nic.lv>>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com<mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com>> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Everyone, Thanks for the interesting discussions! I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members? Regs, Peter From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org<mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org> [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Andres Piazza Sent: 01 June 2016 15:01 To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv<mailto:katrina@nic.lv>>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com<mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com>> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Dear Katrina and all, I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community. But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates not from the same region. I am sure this is something achievable. One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation. Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table. Best, Andrés Piazza General Manager LACTLD El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió: Hi Barrack, Thank you very much for your comment! I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account: 1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!! 2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations. 3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache. Thanks! Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv><mailto:katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Katrina, I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation. Regards On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv><mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote: Dear All, Thanks for all your comments! To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions. VOTING: Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course). The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August! SELECTION: In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates. DIVERSITY: We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position. Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity. However, this might not be enough. Your thoughts? Kind regards, ]{atrina -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
In all the documents (CWG proposal, the guideline developed by the GRC, in the email to the community we are working on) it is specifically stated that it is open to any ccTLD. What may seem confusing here is that we talk about ccNSO members to the CSC. The term “ccNSO (appointed) members to the CSC” is used to distinguish them from “GNSO (appointed) members” to the CSC. They will be called ccNSO members to the CSC but it has nothing to do with the actual ccNSO membership. Hope that clarifies. Regards, ]{atrina From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Peter Van Roste Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:56 PM To: sdeerhake@nic.as; Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org>; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Stephen, I fully agree. I believe it important that the appointees work for a ccTLD and give regular feedback, whether they are from ccNSO member registries or non ccNSO member ccTLD registries. Peter From: Stephen Deerhake [mailto:sdeerhake@nic.as] Sent: 01 June 2016 15:51 To: Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org <mailto:peter@centr.org> >; Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org <mailto:andres@lactld.org> >; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> >; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com <mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com> > Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Peter, I think restricting CSC membership to people drawn from ccNSO member ccTLD Registries would be a big error. To do so would be to suggest that it's OK for the IANA to provide two levels of service --one for ccNSO member Registries, and another for non-ccNSO member Registries. And besides, by excluding consideration of the potential talent pool that no doubt exists in non ccNSO member ccTLD Registries, we will deprive the Community of that potential talent. Best, /Stephen From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org> [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Peter Van Roste Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 9:11 AM To: Andres Piazza <andres@lactld.org <mailto:andres@lactld.org> >; Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> >; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com <mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com> > Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Everyone, Thanks for the interesting discussions! I had one question: do the CSC reps need to be ccNSO members? Regs, Peter From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org> [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Andres Piazza Sent: 01 June 2016 15:01 To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> >; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com <mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com> > Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Dear Katrina and all, I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community. But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates not from the same region. I am sure this is something achievable. One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation. Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table. Best, Andrés Piazza General Manager LACTLD El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió: Hi Barrack, Thank you very much for your comment! I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account: 1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!! 2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations. 3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache. Thanks! Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Katrina, I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation. Regards On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> <katrina@nic.lv> wrote: Dear All, Thanks for all your comments! To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions. VOTING: Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course). The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August! SELECTION: In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates. DIVERSITY: We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position. Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity. However, this might not be enough. Your thoughts? Kind regards, ]{atrina -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
On 01/06/16 14:50, Stephen Deerhake wrote:
And besides, by excluding consideration of the potential talent pool that no doubt exists in non ccNSO member ccTLD Registries, we will deprive the Community of that potential talent.
Agreed. For examples, look at the work done in the CWG by both Paul Kane (from a non-member registry) and Lise Fuhr (first from a non-member registry, and now not associated with a ccTLD).
Dear Andres, Thank you for sharing your views! The key point here is “selecting two QUALIFIED candidates”. If two candidates are qualified but come from the same region it would be a bad service to the ccTLD community of all regions to dismiss one of the qualified ones and take not (or not so) qualified person only because it comes from another region. Plus, let me stress again, we should not forget about the diversity of the full slate (yes, it will be very tricky). And certainly the Councillors need to hear out all concerns and think about all possible outcomes before taking the decision. If a councillor is willing to step forward – we appreciate that and will evaluate their applications as all the others! But certainly the slots are not reserved for the councillors. Anyone from the ccTLD community can apply! Thanks for your committment! It is highly appreciated :-) Regards, ]{atrina From: Andres Piazza [mailto:andres@lactld.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:01 PM To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Dear Katrina and all, I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community. But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates not from the same region. I am sure this is something achievable. One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation. Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table. Best, Andrés Piazza General Manager LACTLD El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió: Hi Barrack, Thank you very much for your comment! I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account: 1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!! 2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations. 3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache. Thanks! Regards, ]{atrina -----Original Message----- From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM To: Katrina Sataki <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> <katrina@nic.lv> Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Hi Katrina, I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation. Regards On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> <katrina@nic.lv> wrote: Dear All, Thanks for all your comments! To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and questions. VOTING: Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to apply for CSC, of course). The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council. Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August! SELECTION: In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates. DIVERSITY: We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position. Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2 candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity. However, this might not be enough. Your thoughts? Kind regards, ]{atrina -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
Dear Katrina, thanks for your response. I reply below El 1/6/16 a las 11:15, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Dear Andres,
Thank you for sharing your views!
The key point here is “selecting two QUALIFIED candidates”. If two candidates are qualified but come from the same region it would be a bad service to the ccTLD community of all regions to dismiss one of the qualified ones and take not (or not so) qualified person only because it comes from another region.
It is hard to anticipate how the candidacies will be presented but I am confident that there will be more than 2 people qualified enough. And in that sense, my suggestion is to choose (among those that are qualified) people from 2 different regions instead of trying to identify who is more qualified based on details.
Plus, let me stress again, we should not forget about the diversity of the full slate (yes, it will be very tricky).
Of course, regional diversity is not the only dimension.
And certainly the Councillors need to hear out all concerns and think about all possible outcomes before taking the decision.
If a councillor is willing to step forward – we appreciate that and will evaluate their applications as all the others! But certainly the slots are not reserved for the councillors. Anyone from the ccTLD community can apply!
Indeed. And that is why I can only express a preference here (that preference being that those people are not councillors but other members of the community). Regards, Andrés
Thanks for your committment! It is highly appreciated :-)
Regards,
]{atrina
*From:*Andres Piazza [mailto:andres@lactld.org] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:01 PM *To:* Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>; 'Barrack Otieno' <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> *Cc:* ccnso-council@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Katrina and all,
I have followed closely the discussion and agree with the current approach, the one that you have summarized including this last response to Barrack. The chosen members must be professionals able to represent the ccTLD community.
But I have one additional comment taking in consideration the challenge of diversity while having only 2 seats. I believe the council is in position to commit at least with selecting 2 qualified candidates *not from the same region*. I am sure this is something achievable.
One more thing, and this is more a preference. I believe it may be good to select qualified people that are not council members to strenghten the community engagement on the global proccesses. Council members are already influential people and our communities could benefit from broadening the base of global representation.
Finally, I commit to work with LAC community to at least provide a couple of names to bring to the table.
Best,
Andrés Piazza
General Manager
LACTLD
El 1/6/16 a las 9:26, Katrina Sataki escribió:
Hi Barrack,
Thank you very much for your comment!
I agree with your point. BUT! Please take into account:
1) we have to select only 2 members. As Alejandra rightfully pointed out, there's no much room for diversity. We have 5 regions, we have really big, medium-sized and small registries. We have ccTLDs run by private comapnies, governmental institutions, academic institutions, NGOs, not for profit organisations, etc. 2 seats!!!
2) I think that this time it is not only about representation and goodwill. If we needed to choose a dentist, for example, we would not think "Our eye doctor is old and comes from Europe, the surgeon is a young Brazilian, psychotherapist is very small and skinny - so, the dentist must be a big woman from Australia" No, we would look for a professional who knows how to fix an aching tooth. If the big woman from Australia happens to be a superb dentist - it's wonderful. But if she does not have a clue, then better not to let her touch our teeth. I think this is what my colleagues councillors mean when they say that knowledge of IANA system should be prior to other considerations.
3) the diversity of the entire CSC composition should be considered. But! Liaisons do not vote. Members do. Therefore the members we select must be professionals who are able to soothe our toothache.
Thanks!
Regards,
]{atrina
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>
Cc: ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Hi Katrina,
I would like to emphasize on one point diversity. We should strive to be diverse since it always attracts goodwill due to the fact that it enhances representation.
Regards
On 6/1/16, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> <mailto:katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear All,
Thanks for all your comments!
To foster further discussion I’ll try to address your comments and
questions.
VOTING:
Those who responded support the idea of having a sub-committee. Please
note that according to the current plan in any case evaluation of
candidates and selection of 2 CSC members from the ccNSO is done by
full ccNSO Council (with exception of those Councillors who decide to
apply for CSC, of course).
The role of the sub-committee we need to agree on is: do we want the
sub-committee to only liaise with the RySG and GNSO – OR – we agree
that the sub-committee also votes on the full slate on behalf of the ccNSO Council.
Alejandra supported the first option. As far as I understand, Debbie
also prefers the first option. What do others think? Please take into
account that if we ask for a full ccNSO Council vote we will need a
quorate ccNSO Council either on a call or via emails in early August!
SELECTION:
In the guideline there will be requirements for CSC members and in
their applications the candidates will be asked to meet these
requirements. I think these requirements should be used to evaluate the candidates.
DIVERSITY:
We need to select people who know their stuff. At the same time, the
CWG in their proposal clearly stated that diversity needs to be
considered. Yes, we need knowledgeable people but are we ok if all the
members of the CSC (2 from ccNSO and 2 from GNSO) are from the same
region? If yes, we must be ready to 1) accept this risk and 2) justify our position.
Yes, we will coordinate the full slate with the GNSO and hopefully
will be able to work on diversity. Other SO/ACs are asked to submit 2
candidates each even though they have only 1 seat each. We hope that
this would give us (ccNSO and GNSO) a leverage to ensure diversity.
However, this might not be enough.
Your thoughts?
Kind regards,
]{atrina
--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
participants (5)
-
Andres Piazza -
Katrina Sataki -
Nigel Roberts -
Peter Van Roste -
Stephen Deerhake