Hi, I wanted to remind those in the Constituencies/SGs that the council resolution regarding transition call for this activity to be completed by 7 October;
c. Taking into consideration the input from the NCAs, if any, both GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder Groups should attempt to reach agreement on the seating for each of the three NCAs for the first year of the new bicameral Council and communicate the results to the Council not later than 7 October 2009.
with a fail safe of:
d. If the GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder Groups are unable to reach agreement, then the new, inexperienced NCA will take the non-voting Council seat and random selection will be used to assign the other two NCAs to Houses before the Council meeting on 8 October 2009.
Note: If I need to do a random selection, I will use the Wednesday 7 Oct Powerball Lottery number (http://www.powerball.com/powerball/pb_numbers.asp ) as seed to the IETF RFC3797 random selection algorithm with the names ordered alphabetic by first name.; ie. Olga, Terry. Doing so, however, will result in at least one of the NCAs being given an assignment that is contrary to their expressed intersts. thanks a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
This note is to notify the council that I have worked with the 3 NCAs of the new council and have come up with their input to the council regarding their recommendation for assigning NCA Council Seats as required by the second bullet. This was an action that needed to be completed by 30 September.
As a reminder, the Transition plan approved at the last meeting contains the following:
----
For the period starting on 28 October 2009 and continuing only through the 2010 ICANN Annual Meeting, the following procedure will be used to assign NCAs to Council seats:
• ICANN Staff should ensure that a Statement of Interest is received from Andrey Kolesnikov and sent to the Council not later than 30 September 2009.
• Not later than 30 September 2009, new and existing NCAs will make best efforts to collaborate and provide their input to the GNSO Council regarding their recommendations for assigning NCA Council seats. Such input should include any seating assignments that any of the NCAs would individually be uncomfortable taking along with their reasons.
• Taking into consideration the input from the NCAs, if any, both GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder Groups should attempt to reach agreement on the seating for each of the three NCAs for the first year of the new bicameral Council and communicate the results to the Council not later than 7 October 2009.
• If the GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder Groups are unable to reach agreement, then the new, inexperienced NCA will take the non-voting Council seat and random selection will be used to assign the other two NCAs to Houses before the Council meeting on 8 October 2009.
• In the meeting scheduled for 8 October 2009, the Council will acknowledge the results of this process and confirm that it was properly conducted.
-----
In terms of the first point Glen is currently working with Andrey to get the required SOI completed
In terms of the second point, we have recorded the output of the NCAs and make the following recommendations as input to further discussions:
Contracted Parties House - Andrey Non contracted Parties House - Terry Independent non-voting - Olga
The Process we followed:
- First I created a doodle where each of them could indicate their preference. This was one of the 'yes-green, maybe-yellow, no-red' doodles.
I set this up as hidden poll, so that consideration for each other's choices would not stand in the way of each of them stating, in the first instance, their personal preference.
The idea was that once we saw the individual preferences, they could then negotiate a final list based on knowing what each other really wanted, or was willing, to do.
I also made myself available for any of them who wanted to get more background information, but no one took me up on the offer.
Note: I also told them that if they hated the idea of the poll we could start in another way, but I was looking for a way to reach a conclusion quickly.
- The individual preferences, a snapshot of which is included below, showed that there was one possible solution from the beginning which would avoid any of them having to take a position they did not want.
The results (depicted below):
Olga and Andrey were both interested in the Contracted Parties House
All three of them were willing to be placed in the Non-Contracted parties house. Terry indicated he was only willing to be placed the Non-contracted parties house
Olga was the only one indicating willingness to take the Independent non voting role
I suggested this as a starting position for their discussions, but also suggested they could ignore it, if they desired.
- In the following conversation they all accepted the proposal, each for his/her own reasons:
Andrey felt that his experience in managing a zone with 2.3 M domains, which is 99% compatible to a .COM environment, made him feel comfortable going into the Contracted Parties house.
Terry felt that based on his experience in industry the Non Contracted parties house was the most appropriate.
Olga was willing to take any of the roles, though she had a preference for the Contracted parties.
- It is now up to the houses, to decide if they are willing to accept the input of the NCAs. If not, they will need to come up with another proposal.
I invite the NCA's to add any comments to this they feel would be useful to the Houses in making their decision, but am not in any way obliging them to do so.
I should mention that Andrey has been added to this list (as all newly appointed/elected council members will be), and I welcome him. Of course the incoming council members are observers on the list until 28 October. In keep with our normal processes, I invite the new council members to participate on the list as fully as they feel ready to with voting and the making of motions being the only exceptions.
Regards,
a.
<nca-pref.tiff>