FW: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Councillors, Any thoughts on the preferences re decision making for selecting the Customer Standing Committee? Any other comments/suggestions? Thank you! Kind regards, ]{atrina From: Katrina Sataki [mailto:katrina@nic.lv] Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 2:44 PM To: 'ccnso-council@icann.org' <ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: ATTENTION! Information on CSC Dear Colleagues, For your convenience and in order to foster further discussions we have prepared information (see attachment) on things we need to do and issues we need to agree on in order to have a functional Customer Standing Committee by 10 August. Please have a look at the document. Your ideas and input is crucial! Although there are still things that are not entirely clear, I believe we have a rather complete picture of the path forward. Please do not hesitate to ask if further clarification is needed! Have a nice weekend! Kindest regards, ]{atrina
Dear Katrina The schedule seems like we'll be running a marathon, but do hope we'll be successful in this endeavor. *;)* Regarding your questions: 1. How to ensure diversity? With only two spots available, it won't be easy. 1. What to do if our top 2 candidates are: 1. from the same region: We could evaluate how far ranked the top 5 candidates are among themselves and see if there is a possibility to select our candidates from different regions. In any case, we could hope to see real diversity in the full slate. 2. both are not willing to serve 3 years: we appoint them anyway and see in 20 months if there is still no will to continue for one more year. If that is the case then we could use the vacancy procedure. 2. How to vote for the final selection of 2 ccNSO members to the CSC (email or call)? I'm open for any mechanism. 3. How to ensure quorum in any case? If we decide to do a call, the time should be at 11 UTC (even though it is tough on Debbie & me it's the most amiable hour for the majority). By email every Councilor should send their vote and/or comments. 4. Adoption of CSC: I prefer the second option that says as follows: 1. The ccNSO Council *nominates a sub-committee of Councillors* (e.g., 1 Councillor per region and 1 NomCom appointed Councillor) to select the final slate in consultation with the RySG and the GNSO Council and *the full ccNSO Council votes on the full slate* (email or call). Sincerely, Alejandra *Registro de Dominios .gt* -- Universidad del Valle de Guatemala. 18 Ave. 11-95. Z. 15. V.H. III. Edificio *J*. Oficina *204*. *Tels:* *+502.23688564* y *+502.23688565* * <http://www.gt/> ** <https://www.facebook.com/DominiosGT> <https://twitter.com/DominiosGT> ** <https://plus.google.com/u/0/107159401057178225886/posts> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/registro-de-dominios-gt>* On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear Councillors,
Any thoughts on the preferences re decision making for selecting the Customer Standing Committee?
Any other comments/suggestions?
Thank you!
Kind regards,
]{atrina
*From:* Katrina Sataki [mailto:katrina@nic.lv] *Sent:* Friday, May 27, 2016 2:44 PM *To:* 'ccnso-council@icann.org' <ccnso-council@icann.org> *Subject:* ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Colleagues,
For your convenience and in order to foster further discussions we have prepared information (see attachment) on things we need to do and issues we need to agree on in order to have a functional Customer Standing Committee by 10 August.
Please have a look at the document. Your ideas and input is crucial!
Although there are still things that are not entirely clear, I believe we have a rather complete picture of the path forward. Please do not hesitate to ask if further clarification is needed!
Have a nice weekend!
Kindest regards,
]{atrina
Hi Katrina I agree with Alejandra’s comments - even the time of any call :) I think that nominating a sub committee makes sense given the time constraints on the whole process but like the accountability of the full Council voting. What I would like to see as part of this though, is clear criteria that are going to be used as a guide for evaluating the applicants. What are the key skills required and the priority of each. Some sort of decision making matrix if you like so that there is some objectivity of assessing the candidates based on what we believe are the most important. Geographical and gender diversity can be part of the mix but what priority do they have in comparison with knowledge of IANA systems. If we can agree the skills we want our representatives on this to possess and be able to document those as part of a decision matrix that should hopefully make the decision process a bit easier and consistent. Ideally if we can include the sort of skill set we are after in our call for expressions of interest we can get an ideal pool of candidates to consider. Cheers Debbie
On 1/06/2016, at 05:51, Alejandra Reynoso <alejandra.reynoso@cctld.gt> wrote:
Dear Katrina
The schedule seems like we'll be running a marathon, but do hope we'll be successful in this endeavor. ;)
Regarding your questions: How to ensure diversity? With only two spots available, it won't be easy. What to do if our top 2 candidates are: from the same region: We could evaluate how far ranked the top 5 candidates are among themselves and see if there is a possibility to select our candidates from different regions. In any case, we could hope to see real diversity in the full slate. both are not willing to serve 3 years: we appoint them anyway and see in 20 months if there is still no will to continue for one more year. If that is the case then we could use the vacancy procedure. How to vote for the final selection of 2 ccNSO members to the CSC (email or call)? I'm open for any mechanism. How to ensure quorum in any case? If we decide to do a call, the time should be at 11 UTC (even though it is tough on Debbie & me it's the most amiable hour for the majority). By email every Councilor should send their vote and/or comments. Adoption of CSC: I prefer the second option that says as follows: The ccNSO Council nominates a sub-committee of Councillors (e.g., 1 Councillor per region and 1 NomCom appointed Councillor) to select the final slate in consultation with the RySG and the GNSO Council and the full ccNSO Council votes on the full slate (email or call). Sincerely, Alejandra
Registro de Dominios .gt -- Universidad del Valle de Guatemala. 18 Ave. 11-95. Z. 15. V.H. III. Edificio J. Oficina 204. Tels: +502.23688564 y +502.23688565
<http://www.gt/> <https://www.facebook.com/DominiosGT> <https://twitter.com/DominiosGT> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/107159401057178225886/posts> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/registro-de-dominios-gt> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>> wrote:
Dear Councillors,
Any thoughts on the preferences re decision making for selecting the Customer Standing Committee?
Any other comments/suggestions?
Thank you!
Kind regards,
]{atrina
From: Katrina Sataki [mailto:katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>] Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 2:44 PM To: 'ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>' <ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>> Subject: ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Colleagues,
For your convenience and in order to foster further discussions we have prepared information (see attachment) on things we need to do and issues we need to agree on in order to have a functional Customer Standing Committee by 10 August.
Please have a look at the document. Your ideas and input is crucial!
Although there are still things that are not entirely clear, I believe we have a rather complete picture of the path forward. Please do not hesitate to ask if further clarification is needed!
Have a nice weekend!
Kindest regards,
]{atrina
Whatever method we decide upon, it should be able to cope with the possibility of at least one, if not more than one Council member wishing to be considered. (Full disclosure: it's likely that I, for certain, would probably wish to apply and I am guessing that at least another Council member may wish to be considered.) Secondly, while this may be a more meritocratic view, I think that ethnic and gender diversity considerations should play little part in our considerations for this sort of role -- we want the best and most knowledgable candidates for this important role irrespective of their national origin, gender or other personal characteristics. For the avoidance of doubt, this should not mean that I am arguing against us promoting equality of opportunity. Quite the opposite, in fact -- I submit that we must definitely, in the short time available, reach out to women and potential candidates from historically underparticipating regions and strongly encourage them to submit themselves for consideration. That way we get the best pool of potential candidates. We should also reach out outside the ccNSO as best we can in the time. However, we may only select two representatives - and, following on from Debbie's proposal we do want people who have the greatest knowledge of the IANA, technically, legally and historically. It seems likely that the most appropriate way forward would be to have a subset of Council as a Selection Panel, and that Panel to be guided by Debbie's criteria. That Panel could recommend a shortlist to Council (say three or four) from which Council could make a decision. Any Council Member interested in applying would, self-evidently, be unable to serve on the Selection Panel, and would need to recuse themselves from voting in full Council if they were shortlisted. It would seem also appropriate to hold two, sequential, votes on the shortlisted candidates in full Council, one for each seat available, for the obvious reasons of participation. Do these thoughts help?? On 01/06/16 04:36, ebbie Monahan wrote:
Hi Katrina
I agree with Alejandra’s comments - even the time of any call :)
I think that nominating a sub committee makes sense given the time constraints on the whole process but like the accountability of the full Council voting.
What I would like to see as part of this though, is clear criteria that are going to be used as a guide for evaluating the applicants. What are the key skills required and the priority of each. Some sort of decision making matrix if you like so that there is some objectivity of assessing the candidates based on what we believe are the most important. Geographical and gender diversity can be part of the mix but what priority do they have in comparison with knowledge of IANA systems.
If we can agree the skills we want our representatives on this to possess and be able to document those as part of a decision matrix that should hopefully make the decision process a bit easier and consistent. Ideally if we can include the sort of skill set we are after in our call for expressions of interest we can get an ideal pool of candidates to consider.
Cheers Debbie
On 1/06/2016, at 05:51, Alejandra Reynoso <alejandra.reynoso@cctld.gt <mailto:alejandra.reynoso@cctld.gt>> wrote:
Dear Katrina
The schedule seems like we'll be running a marathon, but do hope we'll be successful in this endeavor. *;)*
Regarding your questions:
1. How to ensure diversity? With only two spots available, it won't be easy. 1. What to do if our top 2 candidates are: 1. from the same region: We could evaluate how far ranked the top 5 candidates are among themselves and see if there is a possibility to select our candidates from different regions. In any case, we could hope to see real diversity in the full slate. 2. both are not willing to serve 3 years: we appoint them anyway and see in 20 months if there is still no will to continue for one more year. If that is the case then we could use the vacancy procedure. 2. How to vote for the final selection of 2 ccNSO members to the CSC (email or call)? I'm open for any mechanism. 3. How to ensure quorum in any case? If we decide to do a call, the time should be at 11 UTC (even though it is tough on Debbie & me it's the most amiable hour for the majority). By email every Councilor should send their vote and/or comments. 4. Adoption of CSC:I prefer the second option that says as follows: 1. The ccNSO Council *nominates a sub-committee of Councillors* (e.g., 1 Councillor per region and 1 NomCom appointed Councillor) to select the final slate in consultation with the RySG and the GNSO Council and *the full ccNSO Council votes on the full slate* (email or call).
Sincerely, Alejandra
*Registro de Dominios .gt* -- Universidad del Valle de Guatemala. 18 Ave. 11-95. Z. 15. V.H. III. Edificio *J*. Oficina *204*. *Tels:* *+502.23688564* y *+502.23688565* * * *<http://www.gt/> **<https://www.facebook.com/DominiosGT> <https://twitter.com/DominiosGT> **<https://plus.google.com/u/0/107159401057178225886/posts> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/registro-de-dominios-gt>*
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>> wrote:
__ __
Dear Councillors,____
__ __
Any thoughts on the preferences re decision making for selecting the Customer Standing Committee?____
Any other comments/suggestions?____
Thank you!____
__ __
Kind regards,____
__ __
]{atrina____
__ __
*From:*Katrina Sataki [mailto:katrina@nic.lv <mailto:katrina@nic.lv>] *Sent:* Friday, May 27, 2016 2:44 PM *To:* 'ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>' <ccnso-council@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>> *Subject:* ATTENTION! Information on CSC____
__ __
Dear Colleagues,____
__ __
For your convenience and in order to foster further discussions we have prepared information (see attachment) on things we need to do and issues we need to agree on in order to have a functional Customer Standing Committee by 10 August.____
__ __
Please have a look at the document. Your ideas and input is crucial! ____
__ __
Although there are still things that are not entirely clear, I believe we have a rather complete picture of the path forward. Please do not hesitate to ask if further clarification is needed! ____
__ __
Have a nice weekend!____
__ __
Kindest regards,____
__ __
]{atrina____
__ __
I support the sub-committee option to help identify two candidates for the CSC. For geo-diveristy and gender, it's not about the individual gender where they're from. It's about both candidates to show the ability of ensuring when they perform the role, these issues are covered and considered as part of the decision making process. We have many experienced councilors and ccNSO members who can contribute their nominating experiences in ICANN or in their ccTLD governance processes. I will be happy to help document these skill sets. I also think we can keep an open channel with GNSO and talk about their selection approach. Ching On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Debbie Monahan <dnc@dnc.org.nz> wrote:
Hi Katrina
I agree with Alejandra’s comments - even the time of any call :)
I think that nominating a sub committee makes sense given the time constraints on the whole process but like the accountability of the full Council voting.
What I would like to see as part of this though, is clear criteria that are going to be used as a guide for evaluating the applicants. What are the key skills required and the priority of each. Some sort of decision making matrix if you like so that there is some objectivity of assessing the candidates based on what we believe are the most important. Geographical and gender diversity can be part of the mix but what priority do they have in comparison with knowledge of IANA systems.
If we can agree the skills we want our representatives on this to possess and be able to document those as part of a decision matrix that should hopefully make the decision process a bit easier and consistent. Ideally if we can include the sort of skill set we are after in our call for expressions of interest we can get an ideal pool of candidates to consider.
Cheers Debbie
On 1/06/2016, at 05:51, Alejandra Reynoso <alejandra.reynoso@cctld.gt> wrote:
Dear Katrina
The schedule seems like we'll be running a marathon, but do hope we'll be successful in this endeavor. *;)*
Regarding your questions:
1. How to ensure diversity? With only two spots available, it won't be easy. 1. What to do if our top 2 candidates are: 1. from the same region: We could evaluate how far ranked the top 5 candidates are among themselves and see if there is a possibility to select our candidates from different regions. In any case, we could hope to see real diversity in the full slate. 2. both are not willing to serve 3 years: we appoint them anyway and see in 20 months if there is still no will to continue for one more year. If that is the case then we could use the vacancy procedure . 2. How to vote for the final selection of 2 ccNSO members to the CSC (email or call)? I'm open for any mechanism. 3. How to ensure quorum in any case? If we decide to do a call, the time should be at 11 UTC (even though it is tough on Debbie & me it's the most amiable hour for the majority). By email every Councilor should send their vote and/or comments. 4. Adoption of CSC: I prefer the second option that says as follows: 1. The ccNSO Council *nominates a sub-committee of Councillors* (e.g., 1 Councillor per region and 1 NomCom appointed Councillor) to select the final slate in consultation with the RySG and the GNSO Council and *the full ccNSO Council votes on the full slate* (email or call).
Sincerely, Alejandra
*Registro de Dominios .gt* -- Universidad del Valle de Guatemala. 18 Ave. 11-95. Z. 15. V.H. III. Edificio *J*. Oficina *204*. *Tels:* *+502.23688564 <%2B502.23688564>* y *+502.23688565 <%2B502.23688565>*
* <http://www.gt/> ** <https://www.facebook.com/DominiosGT> <https://twitter.com/DominiosGT> ** <https://plus.google.com/u/0/107159401057178225886/posts> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/registro-de-dominios-gt>*
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
Dear Councillors,
Any thoughts on the preferences re decision making for selecting the Customer Standing Committee?
Any other comments/suggestions?
Thank you!
Kind regards,
]{atrina
*From:* Katrina Sataki [mailto:katrina@nic.lv] *Sent:* Friday, May 27, 2016 2:44 PM *To:* 'ccnso-council@icann.org' <ccnso-council@icann.org> *Subject:* ATTENTION! Information on CSC
Dear Colleagues,
For your convenience and in order to foster further discussions we have prepared information (see attachment) on things we need to do and issues we need to agree on in order to have a functional Customer Standing Committee by 10 August.
Please have a look at the document. Your ideas and input is crucial!
Although there are still things that are not entirely clear, I believe we have a rather complete picture of the path forward. Please do not hesitate to ask if further clarification is needed!
Have a nice weekend!
Kindest regards,
]{atrina
-- Ching Chiao Founder and CEO www.*Brandma*.co 中域国际集团 +886.918.211372 || +86.135.20187032 Beijing . Chengdu . Hangzhou . Hong Kong . Shenzhen. Taipei
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
participants (5)
-
Alejandra Reynoso -
Ching Chiao -
Debbie Monahan -
Katrina Sataki -
Nigel Roberts