Thanks, Donna. Excellent feedback. Based on your response and some of the earlier conversations, I agree that one of the decision points will be to what degree the Charter will prescribe diversity & representation, versus providing the SSC with maximum flexibility (but using Council vote as the ultimate ratification of their output). There probably isn’t a single right or wrong answer, so I’m optimistic that requiring the SSC to self-evaluate after a few selections will yield greater insights as to how well the Charter functions in practice. Thanks again – J. From: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz> Date: Friday, March 3, 2017 at 13:00 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] Draft Motion: Preliminary Adoption of the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) Charter James, all I’ve made a number of changes to the attached motion and also raised a couple of questions for consideration. On the substantive issues. Membership: I have a strong preference to make this a small group and as such opt for membership per SG as described in Option 1. My reading of the Charter is that Option 1 membership also includes the non-voting nominating committee appointee to the Council and the GNSO Leadership Team would also serve as ex-officio members. This means 8 members of the Council would make up the SSC. Option 2 would result in the SSC comprising 11 members of the Council. Diversity: During our discussions of the charter, some have argued that it should be more prescriptive with regards to ensuring that there is a fair/balanced rotation among SGs with regard to candidates nominated/selected for positions. I agree that this is a consideration that the SSC should take into account throughout the selection processes, but this consideration should also be balanced in terms of ensuring that the candidate also has the necessary skills to make a valuable contribution to the role. I believe the language currently in the charter adequately provides for diversity and representativeness: 7. The SSC shall strive as far as possible to achieve balance, representativeness, diversity and sufficient expertise appropriate for the applicable selection process. However, given the SSC will be conducting a review of the charter after applying it to two selection processes, if the SSC believes this is not adequate they can recommend changes. Selection: While I have concerns about the use of full consensus, consensus etc. primarily because I would hate to think that we would ever be in a situation where we have minority view positions coming out of any SSC selection process, I think this is something that the SSC could also consider when they review the charter. Thanks Donna From: council-bounces@gnso.icann.org [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 6:43 PM To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Draft Motion: Preliminary Adoption of the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) Charter Councilors – Attached and copied below, please find a Draft Motion for the adoption of the Standing Selection Committee (SSC) Draft Charter (also attached, but unchanged since our call). Note that we still have yet to address some open questions on the SSC charter, in particular how the SSC is comprised (SGs or Cs), how it reaches its decisions, and whether or not to require it to rotate selected candidates. Please continue discussions on our list in order to make the most of our time together in Copenhagen. Thank you, J. Motion – Preliminary Adoption of GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) Charter Whereas, 1. The GNSO Council expressed the desire to develop a set of criteria and a uniform process for the selection of GNSO representatives to future Review Teams, including for the various reviews mandated by the ICANN Bylaws, and other ICANN structures for which the GNSO will need to appoint, nominate or endorse candidates 2. A small team of Council members worked on such a set of criteria and a uniform process which resulted in a proposed Charter to create a GNSO Standing Selection Committee that will conduct future selections based on agreed, uniform criteria and a documented process (see [include link]. 3. The Council reviewed the charter and discussed that as this is a new entity and approach, it would be desirable to test out the process and criteria outlined in the charter by: 1) Preliminarily adopting the charter, 2) Form the SSC, 3) Task the SSC to at a minimum carry out 2 selection / nomination processes, 4) Review the results as well as the selection / nomination process on the basis of input provided by the SSC, 5) Confirm the GNSO SSC Charter as is, or, as modified based on the review. Resolved, 1. The GNSO Council preliminarily adopts the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) Charter (see [include link] and instructs the GNSO Secretariat to launch a call for volunteers per the membership criteria outlined in the SSC Charter as soon as possible. 2. The GNSO Council instructs the SSC to begin the review of GNSO endorsed candidates for the RDS Review Team, and propose its recommended slate of selected Members, along with any Alternates, for Council consideration at the latest by its 20 April 2017 meeting. 3. The GNSO Council instructs the SSC to develop the criteria and the process for the selection of the GNSO Representative to the Empowered Community for GNSO Council consideration by its June 2017 meeting, and following the approval by the GNSO Council, carry out the selection process for this role. 4. At the completion of these two tasks, the GNSO Council requests the SSC to report back to the GNSO Council with its assessment of whether the charter provides sufficient guidance and flexibility to carry out its work, and/or whether any modifications should be considered. 5. The GNSO Council thanks the small group of volunteers, Susan Kawaguchi, Ed Morris, Valerie Tan, and the GNSO Council leadership team, for its work on the charter.