FW: Final Draft response letter on re-balancing the NomCom
From: "Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC" <sdeerhake@nic.as> Date: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 09:54 To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org> Cc: "cnso-council@icann.org" <cnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] Final Draft response letter on re-balancing the NomCom Greetings, Last sentence of the first paragraph on p. 2 (Begins “Further, independent…”) refers to “papers” twice. We might want to tweak this a bit. 2nd paragraph on p. 2 should read “…on the other side as a Decisional Participant.” 3rd paragraph on p. 2 should read “Although we appreciate the difference in responsibilities between the NomCom appointing organization and being a Decisional Participant, we do believe that the role as a Decisional Participant reflects the role of the ccNSO in ICANN and the value it brings to ICANN as a whole, and this should be reflected in the NomCom as well.” Response to Question two beginning “Yes, because the ICANN SO’s…” should read “Yes we do, because the ICANN SO’s..” Response to Question three should read “It is our opinion that such a review of balance should take place every time a full-cycle of appointments has taken place. For example, every 5-6 years after the last review, when – assuming the current proposed bylaw change becomes effective – a delegate has served two years on the NomCom with a minimum of one term between their first and second terms. Response to Question 4 should read “It is our view that the…” Response to Question 5 should read “…Participants and as a member of the…” Overall, this is a very solid piece of work and I believe it captures the spirit of our discussion of this matter. Best Regards, Stephen From: Ccnso-council <ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Bart Boswinkel via Ccnso-council <ccNSO-Council@icann.org> Reply-To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org> Date: Monday, June 26, 2023 at 09:36 To: "ccNSO-Council@icann.org" <ccNSO-Council@icann.org> Subject: [ccnso-council] Final Draft response letter on re-balancing the NomCom Dear all, Please find included the final draft letter in reponse to request for input on re-balancing the NomCom (see also: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OeX5vRNKkgOME5IWbTeAPxffdMhednPE/edit) You are kindly requested to express you final view by Thursday 29 June 2023, noon UTC. This would allow Council leadership to update this final draft if any immediate concerns. Alejandra intends to submit the response June 29 or June 30. On behalf of Alejandra, Bart P.S. Tomorrow you may expect a first draft on ccNSO Council input with respect to PTI Bylaw change
Hi all! No further comments from me Great doc! Irina From: Ccnso-council <ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC via Ccnso-council Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 7:53 AM To: Ccnso-council <ccNSO-Council@icann.org> Subject: [ccnso-council] FW: Final Draft response letter on re-balancing the NomCom From: "Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC" <sdeerhake@nic.as <mailto:sdeerhake@nic.as> > Date: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 09:54 To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org <mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org> > Cc: "cnso-council@icann.org <mailto:cnso-council@icann.org> " <cnso-council@icann.org <mailto:cnso-council@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] Final Draft response letter on re-balancing the NomCom Greetings, Last sentence of the first paragraph on p. 2 (Begins “Further, independent…”) refers to “papers” twice. We might want to tweak this a bit. 2nd paragraph on p. 2 should read “…on the other side as a Decisional Participant.” 3rd paragraph on p. 2 should read “Although we appreciate the difference in responsibilities between the NomCom appointing organization and being a Decisional Participant, we do believe that the role as a Decisional Participant reflects the role of the ccNSO in ICANN and the value it brings to ICANN as a whole, and this should be reflected in the NomCom as well.” Response to Question two beginning “Yes, because the ICANN SO’s…” should read “Yes we do, because the ICANN SO’s..” Response to Question three should read “It is our opinion that such a review of balance should take place every time a full-cycle of appointments has taken place. For example, every 5-6 years after the last review, when – assuming the current proposed bylaw change becomes effective – a delegate has served two years on the NomCom with a minimum of one term between their first and second terms. Response to Question 4 should read “It is our view that the…” Response to Question 5 should read “…Participants and as a member of the…” Overall, this is a very solid piece of work and I believe it captures the spirit of our discussion of this matter. Best Regards, Stephen From: Ccnso-council <ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Bart Boswinkel via Ccnso-council <ccNSO-Council@icann.org <mailto:ccNSO-Council@icann.org> > Reply-To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org <mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org> > Date: Monday, June 26, 2023 at 09:36 To: "ccNSO-Council@icann.org <mailto:ccNSO-Council@icann.org> " <ccNSO-Council@icann.org <mailto:ccNSO-Council@icann.org> > Subject: [ccnso-council] Final Draft response letter on re-balancing the NomCom Dear all, Please find included the final draft letter in reponse to request for input on re-balancing the NomCom (see also: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OeX5vRNKkgOME5IWbTeAPxffdMhednPE/edit) You are kindly requested to express you final view by Thursday 29 June 2023, noon UTC. This would allow Council leadership to update this final draft if any immediate concerns. Alejandra intends to submit the response June 29 or June 30. On behalf of Alejandra, Bart P.S. Tomorrow you may expect a first draft on ccNSO Council input with respect to PTI Bylaw change
participants (2)
-
Irina Danelia -
Stephen Deerhake ＠ ASNIC