NCA input to House placement
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.
Thank you very much Avri. This is very helpful. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:32 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] NCA input to House placement
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.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October. Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections. thanks a.
No objections from me. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:27 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
Seems fine to me. Stéphane Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
I object to them joining as Councillors. They should be there as observers only. Sent from my iPhone On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
Hi, Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message. BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions. a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
Thanks Avri. If that is the case I object to them participating as 'observers'. We have been criticised recently for not spending enough time solving problems. I don't see how having to spend time on a call "backfilling" new Councillors will be productive. Let them participate and listen to the discussions but not contribute - let them do that through the existing members. Secondly, I believe that the old members are specifically taking time to "handover" the many items in Seoul (and receiving funding specifically for this purpose). Thanks. Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, 29 September 2009 7:43 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement Hi, Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message. BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions. a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
I am anticipating that our agenda may be shorter than usual so I think that it would be good if we have an agenda item at the beginning to welcome the new Councilors and an agenda item at the end allowing them to ask questions if they have any and if time permits. Other than that it is probably best that the new Councilors are there as observers unless there is a discussion topic that specifically involves them. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:43 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement
Hi,
Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message.
BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions.
a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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
list until 28 October. In keep with our normal
observers on the 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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
Hi, In terms of that agenda, I currently see two dominant issues: 1. Discussion of the contents of the yet to be approved letter form the Board to the GNSO asking for the GNSO to do some work related to the DAG and the IRT recommendations. 2. Any issues that still need to be dealt with in terms of completing the transition/restructuring. E.g. the assignment of NCAs to houses if that has not been completed yet (completion date is listed as 7 Oct) or any other issue that is pending. The agenda will come out this Thursday. If anyone on the council has any issues they think also need to be covered, please let me know. Also in terms of the Board-GNSO-Staff Diner topic - I am thinking that the contents of the yet to be seen letter might be just the thing. Does this sound reasonable? Any other suggestions? I am also thinking that this letter should be on the Wednesday Public Meeting agenda. thanks a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 12:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am anticipating that our agenda may be shorter than usual so I think that it would be good if we have an agenda item at the beginning to welcome the new Councilors and an agenda item at the end allowing them to ask questions if they have any and if time permits. Other than that it is probably best that the new Councilors are there as observers unless there is a discussion topic that specifically involves them.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:43 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement
Hi,
Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message.
BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions.
a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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
list until 28 October. In keep with our normal
observers on the 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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
What output do you anticipate will result from having the letter on the Wednesday agenda? -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:29 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Topic for next Agenda was Re: [] Incoming Council members Hi, In terms of that agenda, I currently see two dominant issues: 1. Discussion of the contents of the yet to be approved letter form the Board to the GNSO asking for the GNSO to do some work related to the DAG and the IRT recommendations. 2. Any issues that still need to be dealt with in terms of completing the transition/restructuring. E.g. the assignment of NCAs to houses if that has not been completed yet (completion date is listed as 7 Oct) or any other issue that is pending. The agenda will come out this Thursday. If anyone on the council has any issues they think also need to be covered, please let me know. Also in terms of the Board-GNSO-Staff Diner topic - I am thinking that the contents of the yet to be seen letter might be just the thing. Does this sound reasonable? Any other suggestions? I am also thinking that this letter should be on the Wednesday Public Meeting agenda. thanks a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 12:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am anticipating that our agenda may be shorter than usual so I think that it would be good if we have an agenda item at the beginning to welcome the new Councilors and an agenda item at the end allowing them to ask questions if they have any and if time permits. Other than that it is probably best that the new Councilors are there as observers unless there is a discussion topic that specifically involves them.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:43 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement
Hi,
Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message.
BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions.
a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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
list until 28 October. In keep with our normal
observers on the 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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 13:35, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
What output do you anticipate will result from having the letter on the Wednesday agenda?
I was thinking something like: making sure the council came to a common understanding of what work there was to do and getting started so it can meet whatever tight deadline they provide. I think the first conversation would be a bit of substance and a bit of process for getting started. I am very much hoping that we have the letter available for a full week before the meeting, and have written a note to the Board secretary and to Denise asking for it to be delivered to the council as quickly as possible once it is approved. I have been told that we will get as soon as it is possible for us to get it. a.
hi, Oops, I answered the wrong question. apologies That was what I would expect from the Thursday meeting. From the Wednesday Public Meeting: an explanation of the issues in the letter and the approach the Council was taking from them. And then a chance for the new council and the Community to exchange some conversation about the approach and the substance. I expect that the process, in keeping with the new mandate will require work by the GNSO community and not just the council, so this will also be a chance to bring that community into the work. a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 14:04, Avri Doria wrote:
On 29 Sep 2009, at 13:35, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
What output do you anticipate will result from having the letter on the Wednesday agenda?
I was thinking something like: making sure the council came to a common understanding of what work there was to do and getting started so it can meet whatever tight deadline they provide. I think the first conversation would be a bit of substance and a bit of process for getting started.
I am very much hoping that we have the letter available for a full week before the meeting, and have written a note to the Board secretary and to Denise asking for it to be delivered to the council as quickly as possible once it is approved. I have been told that we will get as soon as it is possible for us to get it.
a.
(apologies for piecemeal response) For the Board-GNSO-Staff dinner, I would like to add the Mitigating Malicious Conduct measures that were previewed in the webinar earlier today. K -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:29 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Topic for next Agenda was Re: [] Incoming Council members Hi, In terms of that agenda, I currently see two dominant issues: 1. Discussion of the contents of the yet to be approved letter form the Board to the GNSO asking for the GNSO to do some work related to the DAG and the IRT recommendations. 2. Any issues that still need to be dealt with in terms of completing the transition/restructuring. E.g. the assignment of NCAs to houses if that has not been completed yet (completion date is listed as 7 Oct) or any other issue that is pending. The agenda will come out this Thursday. If anyone on the council has any issues they think also need to be covered, please let me know. Also in terms of the Board-GNSO-Staff Diner topic - I am thinking that the contents of the yet to be seen letter might be just the thing. Does this sound reasonable? Any other suggestions? I am also thinking that this letter should be on the Wednesday Public Meeting agenda. thanks a. On 29 Sep 2009, at 12:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am anticipating that our agenda may be shorter than usual so I think that it would be good if we have an agenda item at the beginning to welcome the new Councilors and an agenda item at the end allowing them to ask questions if they have any and if time permits. Other than that it is probably best that the new Councilors are there as observers unless there is a discussion topic that specifically involves them.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:43 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement
Hi,
Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message.
BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions.
a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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
list until 28 October. In keep with our normal
observers on the 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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
We could expand that to include all four over arching issues. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:51 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Topic for next Agenda was Re: [] Incoming Council members
(apologies for piecemeal response)
For the Board-GNSO-Staff dinner, I would like to add the Mitigating Malicious Conduct measures that were previewed in the webinar earlier today.
K
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:29 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Topic for next Agenda was Re: [] Incoming Council members
Hi,
In terms of that agenda, I currently see two dominant issues:
1. Discussion of the contents of the yet to be approved letter form the Board to the GNSO asking for the GNSO to do some work related to the DAG and the IRT recommendations.
2. Any issues that still need to be dealt with in terms of completing the transition/restructuring. E.g. the assignment of NCAs to houses if that has not been completed yet (completion date is listed as 7 Oct) or any other issue that is pending.
The agenda will come out this Thursday. If anyone on the council has any issues they think also need to be covered, please let me know.
Also in terms of the Board-GNSO-Staff Diner topic - I am thinking that the contents of the yet to be seen letter might be just the thing. Does this sound reasonable? Any other suggestions?
I am also thinking that this letter should be on the Wednesday Public Meeting agenda.
thanks a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 12:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am anticipating that our agenda may be shorter than usual so I think that it would be good if we have an agenda item at the beginning to welcome the new Councilors and an agenda item at the end allowing them to ask questions if they have any and if time permits. Other than that it is probably best that the new Councilors are there as observers unless there is a discussion topic that specifically involves them.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:43 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement
Hi,
Sorry if i was unclear. i was suggesting that they be there as observers. But I was not explicit in the part I wrote for that message, only in the part I included from a previous message.
BTW, 'as observers' normally means, in a GNSO context, that they can participate just not vote or make motions.
a.
On 29 Sep 2009, at 11:35, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
I object to them joining as Councillors.
They should be there as observers only.
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2009, at 1:14, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@indom.co m> wrote:
Seems fine to me.
Stéphane
Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
> I should mention that Andrey has been added to this
> 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
list (as all 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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
OK with observers provided the persons being appointed by the Board are also permitted to attend. Have the appointments been made? If so, are the names of our new colleagues available? -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:13 AM To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Incoming Council members was Re: [] NCA input to House placement Seems fine to me. Stéphane Le 29/09/09 15:26, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
On 29 Sep 2009, at 08:32, Avri Doria wrote:
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.
I would like to suggest that incoming council members also be invited to join the next Council call on on 8 October.
Since this is not part of the normal process, I want to confirm that there are no objections.
thanks
a.
On 30 Sep 2009, at 16:57, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
OK with observers provided the persons being appointed by the Board are also permitted to attend.
Have the appointments been made? If so, are the names of our new colleagues available?
Yes they have and I believe have been added to this list at this point. But as they have not been announced to wide world yet, I wasn't sure I wanted to be the first to do so, not being exactly sure of my proper place in this whole scheme of things. But, since you asked, and as I was copied on their messages of congratulation, I will take a chance of making a premature announcement and give you their names and places of employment - leaving the rest of the introduction to them in the form of their SOIs etc.. Debra Hughes - American Red Cross Rafik Dammak - From Tunisia at University of Tokyo and DiploFoundation Rosemary Sinclair - Australian Telecommunications Users Group. I welcome them all to this list and as incoming members of the GNSO Council. I have already communicated to them about Seoul meeting and the opportunity to 'observe' the 8 October GNSO Council teleconference. a.
Hello Kristina,
Have the appointments been made? If so, are the names of our new colleagues available?
Yes - the Board did appoint three people today. I will let staff formally announce the names (I assume they need to contact the affected parties first). Regards, Bruce
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>
Hi, thanks Avri for the reminder. I am available for exchanging comments and ideas about this if GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder Groups think this is needed. Best regards Olga 2009/10/5 Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>
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>
-- Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing. www.south-ssig.com.ar
Avri Likewise I will try to be available if this needs more discussions. Take care Terry From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olga Cavalli Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 8:49 AM To: Avri Doria Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Reminder: Re: [] NCA input to House placement Hi, thanks Avri for the reminder. I am available for exchanging comments and ideas about this if GNSO Council Houses and/or their respective Stakeholder Groups think this is needed. Best regards Olga 2009/10/5 Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> 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> -- Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing. www.south-ssig.com.ar
Dear Avri, I'm ready for the discussion and ideas sharing if this is needed and gNSO Council Houses and/or SGs representatives requires more details. Ref. to your message dated 29th of Sept.: -- In terms of the first point Glen is currently working with Andrey to get the required SOI completed (done). 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 -- Best regards, --andrei
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 7:32 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Reminder: Re: [] NCA input to House placement
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
. 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>
participants (10)
-
Adrian Kinderis -
Andrei Kolesnikov -
Avri Doria -
Avri Doria -
Bruce Tonkin -
Gomes, Chuck -
Olga Cavalli -
Rosette, Kristina -
Stéphane Van Gelder -
Terry L Davis, P.E.