All, On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe. K
Hi, Thanks Kristina. Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted Parties House to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out. I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow. a. On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
Hi, I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment. I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people have reached agreement. Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered: 1. Olga 2. Terry Using alphabetical order for the assignments, 1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House thanks a. On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted Parties House to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
Avri, I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the NCP House. Why is this being ignored ? Philip
Hi, Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA recommendations or come up with another plan. As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA recommendations and there was no consensus on another plan by 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection. a. On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the NCP House. Why is this being ignored ? Philip
I do not believe your assessment is correct Avri. My understanding is that Kristina communicated that the CSG supported seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House but I will let her speak for herself. Regarding the RySG, I sent an email supporting that as well. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:26 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA recommendations or come up with another plan.
As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA recommendations and there was no consensus on another plan by 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection.
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the
NCP House.
Why is this being ignored ? Philip
Hi Chuck, On Oct 8, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I do not believe your assessment is correct Avri. My understanding is that Kristina communicated that the CSG supported seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House but I will let her speak for herself. Regarding the RySG, I sent an email supporting that as well.
Like I guess Avri I must have missed your message, when did you send it? Either way, how would two of four SGs be sufficient? Bill
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:26 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA recommendations or come up with another plan.
As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA recommendations and there was no consensus on another plan by 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection.
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the
NCP House.
Why is this being ignored ? Philip
*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************
What is the NCSG position? Are you opposed to seating Andrei in the Non-Contracted Party House? If so, please say so even if it is just from the NCUC. I happened to talk to RrSG ExCom members and am aware of their position but I will let them communicate that. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:00 AM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi Chuck,
On Oct 8, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I do not believe your assessment is correct Avri. My
understanding is
that Kristina communicated that the CSG supported seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House but I will let her speak for herself. Regarding the RySG, I sent an email supporting that as well.
Like I guess Avri I must have missed your message, when did you send it?
Either way, how would two of four SGs be sufficient?
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:26 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA
recommendations
or come up with another plan.
As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA recommendations and there was no consensus on another plan by 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection.
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the
NCP House.
Why is this being ignored ? Philip
*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************
I meant to say Terry not Andrei. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:03 AM To: William Drake Cc: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] NCA Assignments
What is the NCSG position? Are you opposed to seating Andrei in the Non-Contracted Party House? If so, please say so even if it is just from the NCUC. I happened to talk to RrSG ExCom members and am aware of their position but I will let them communicate that.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:00 AM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi Chuck,
On Oct 8, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I do not believe your assessment is correct Avri. My
understanding is
that Kristina communicated that the CSG supported seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House but I will let her speak for herself. Regarding the RySG, I sent an email supporting that as well.
Like I guess Avri I must have missed your message, when did you send it?
Either way, how would two of four SGs be sufficient?
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:26 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA
recommendations
or come up with another plan.
As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA recommendations and there was no consensus on another plan by 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection.
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the
NCP House.
Why is this being ignored ? Philip
*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************
Hi again, On Oct 8, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
What is the NCSG position?
I can only speak for NCUC. I raised the issue the other day among our leadership and we only had responses from two of the nine people (councilors plus newly elected Exec. Comm), and they had somewhat different perspectives, so there was nothing that could be called a consensus position. At the same time, as of yesterday morning when I got a message from Kristina indicating CSG support and asking for our view, I'd not seen any discussion on the list with other SGs expressing a preference. So it seemed unlikely there was time to go back to our people spread around the world in different time zones, arrive at a clear position, and then engage other SGs on the list and get consensus before the random selection was to kick in.
Are you opposed to seating Andrei in the Non-Contracted Party House?
?? Last I heard the NCAs had suggested
Contracted Parties House - Andrey Non contracted Parties House - Terry Independent non-voting - Olga If so, please say so even if it is just from the NCUC. I happened to talk to RrSG ExCom members and am aware of their position but I will let them communicate that.
Would be good to hear. But we'd agreed an approach and Avri followed it, so on process grounds this discussion is a bit puzzling. Best, Bill
-----Original Message----- From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:00 AM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi Chuck,
On Oct 8, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I do not believe your assessment is correct Avri. My
understanding is
that Kristina communicated that the CSG supported seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House but I will let her speak for herself. Regarding the RySG, I sent an email supporting that as well.
Like I guess Avri I must have missed your message, when did you send it?
Either way, how would two of four SGs be sufficient?
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:26 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA
recommendations
or come up with another plan.
As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA recommendations and there was no consensus on another plan by 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection.
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the
NCP House.
Why is this being ignored ? Philip
I don't think it should be ignored but we would have to change our previously approved plan to not ignore it. I support doing that. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:12 AM To: 'Council GNSO' Subject: RE: [council] NCA Assignments
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the NCP House. Why is this being ignored ? Philip
I believe it was only from the CSG. I never got confirmation from NCSG. a. On 8 Oct 2009, at 13:40, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I don't think it should be ignored but we would have to change our previously approved plan to not ignore it. I support doing that.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:12 AM To: 'Council GNSO' Subject: RE: [council] NCA Assignments
Avri,
I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the NCP House. Why is this being ignored ? Philip
Avri, Do you not mean Andrei instead of Terry? Stéphane Le 08/10/09 11:05, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
Hi,
I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment.
I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people have reached agreement.
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
thanks
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted Parties House to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
hi, No I mean Terry. The fall through random process assigns Andrei to non-voting since he is the newest NCA. a. On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:25, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
Avri,
Do you not mean Andrei instead of Terry?
Stéphane
Le 08/10/09 11:05, « Avri Doria » <avri@psg.com> a écrit :
Hi,
I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment.
I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people have reached agreement.
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
thanks
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted Parties House to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
Hi, Not having heard, and proceeding to the final step,
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 interests.
The lottery number for yesterday was: 2 20 21 38 50 Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names are ordered: 1. Olga 2. Terry Also using alphabetical order for the assignments, 1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House the RFC3797 program run (included below) picks #2 first meaning: Terry is assigned to Contracted Olga is assigned to Non Contracted Andrei, by motion, is non-voting Council seat. a. Run of the RFC3797 program Type size of pool: (or 'exit' to exit) 2 Type number of items to be selected: (or 'exit' to exit) 1 Approximately 1.1 bits of entropy needed. Type #1 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. 2 20 21 38 50 2 20 21 38 50 Type #2 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. end Key is: 2.20.21.38.50./ index hex value of MD5 div selected 1 EFC9E973E94E5D3BB70D8CDE6C0EDBCD 2 -> 2 <- Done, type any character to exit. On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:05, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment.
I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people have reached agreement.
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
thanks
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted Parties House to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
Avri wrote, Run of the RFC3797 program Type size of pool: (or 'exit' to exit) 2 Type number of items to be selected: (or 'exit' to exit) 1 Approximately 1.1 bits of entropy needed. Type #1 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. 2 20 21 38 50 2 20 21 38 50 Type #2 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. end Key is: 2.20.21.38.50./ index hex value of MD5 div selected 1 EFC9E973E94E5D3BB70D8CDE6C0EDBCD 2 -> 2 <- ------------------------------------------------ It seems to me that there is a programing bias here. Entropy (see above) can be defined at the state of disorder in the universe or more generally as a doctrine of inevitable social decline and degeneration. The entropy of the universe is inceasing. Since ICANN's inception, our activities have dramactically contributed to the state of disorder of the universe (witness the GA list or an ICANN workshop) and almost certainly to degeneration. Hence we have ourselves introduced a bias in the "entropic need" specified above. This selection thus cannot be random.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 13:26, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Since ICANN's inception, our activities have dramactically contributed to the state of disorder of the universe (witness the GA list or an ICANN workshop) and almost certainly to degeneration. Hence we have ourselves introduced a bias in the "entropic need" specified above. This selection thus cannot be random.
On the irony side, since this random selection picks something that is exactly the opposite of what the NCAs thought out and then picked, you may be right. On the serious side, I could have used more random seeds to get greater entropy, but for this pick did not think it necessary. Also for a complete discussion on the random nature produced by the program please refer to the RFC. a.
I think it is unfortunate that the results of the random process were communicated before our meeting. I know we agreed on a plan but we could decide to change the plan in today's meeting. There seemed to be strong support for seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House. In my opinion, it would be preferrable to honor that support; I did not see any objection to seating Terry there and both the RySG and CSG communicated their support for that. Assuming that I am correct, i.e., that there is support for seating Terry in the Non-Contracted party house, and assuming that it is desirable to minimize going against the NCA wishes as much as possible, then we could change the decision process to one of the following, both of which would seat Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House and then: 1) seat Andrei in the non-voting Council seat as planned if there was not consensus and Olga in the Contracted Party House; 2) apply a random process for the remaining two seats. It would have been better to consider this before knowing the results of the random process but we could still change the process. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:12 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Not having heard, and proceeding to the final step,
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 interests.
The lottery number for yesterday was: 2 20 21 38 50
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names are ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Also using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
the RFC3797 program run (included below) picks #2 first
meaning:
Terry is assigned to Contracted Olga is assigned to Non Contracted Andrei, by motion, is non-voting Council seat.
a.
Run of the RFC3797 program
Type size of pool: (or 'exit' to exit) 2 Type number of items to be selected: (or 'exit' to exit) 1 Approximately 1.1 bits of entropy needed.
Type #1 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. 2 20 21 38 50 2 20 21 38 50 Type #2 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. end Key is: 2.20.21.38.50./ index hex value of MD5 div selected 1 EFC9E973E94E5D3BB70D8CDE6C0EDBCD 2 -> 2 <-
Done, type any character to exit.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:05, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment.
I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people
have reached
agreement.
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
thanks
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted
Parties House
to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
Hi, Once the lottery number was drawn it was done, all anyone needed to do was run the code. I.e anyone could have known and to pretend otherwise would have achieved nothing. Of course the council can always reconsider its previous decisions. But we should not pretend that things that could be known are not known. a. On 8 Oct 2009, at 13:32, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I think it is unfortunate that the results of the random process were communicated before our meeting. I know we agreed on a plan but we could decide to change the plan in today's meeting. There seemed to be strong support for seating Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House. In my opinion, it would be preferrable to honor that support; I did not see any objection to seating Terry there and both the RySG and CSG communicated their support for that.
Assuming that I am correct, i.e., that there is support for seating Terry in the Non-Contracted party house, and assuming that it is desirable to minimize going against the NCA wishes as much as possible, then we could change the decision process to one of the following, both of which would seat Terry in the Non-Contracted Party House and then: 1) seat Andrei in the non-voting Council seat as planned if there was not consensus and Olga in the Contracted Party House; 2) apply a random process for the remaining two seats.
It would have been better to consider this before knowing the results of the random process but we could still change the process.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:12 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
Not having heard, and proceeding to the final step,
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 interests.
The lottery number for yesterday was: 2 20 21 38 50
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names are ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Also using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
the RFC3797 program run (included below) picks #2 first
meaning:
Terry is assigned to Contracted Olga is assigned to Non Contracted Andrei, by motion, is non-voting Council seat.
a.
Run of the RFC3797 program
Type size of pool: (or 'exit' to exit) 2 Type number of items to be selected: (or 'exit' to exit) 1 Approximately 1.1 bits of entropy needed.
Type #1 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. 2 20 21 38 50 2 20 21 38 50 Type #2 randomness or 'end' followed by new line. Up to 16 integers or the word 'float' followed by up to 16 x.y format reals. end Key is: 2.20.21.38.50./ index hex value of MD5 div selected 1 EFC9E973E94E5D3BB70D8CDE6C0EDBCD 2 -> 2 <-
Done, type any character to exit.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:05, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment.
I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people
have reached
agreement.
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
thanks
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted
Parties House
to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
I was sleeping when you sent this Avri; if not, I would have responded. Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:06 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
Hi,
I have not heard from any of the other SG representative on the subject of NCA assignment.
I will run the lottery shortly unless I hear that people have reached agreement.
Using alphabetical order for the picks, the names will be ordered:
1. Olga 2. Terry
Using alphabetical order for the assignments,
1st name picked goes to Contracted Parties House 2nd name picked goes to Non Contracted Parties House
thanks
a.
On 8 Oct 2009, at 00:53, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Kristina.
Assuming the NCSG agrees, it remains for the Contracted
Parties House
to agree or not to the assignment of Andrei. If they do, I assume the assignment of Olga as the non voting just falls out.
I am in the UK, and about to go to sleep after a longs day's flight. I will hold off running the random selection until I hear back from folks tomorrow.
a.
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:08, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
All,
On behalf of the Commercial Stakeholder Group, I write to advise that Terry's preference to be assigned to the Non-Contracted Parties House is acceptable to us. I communicated this information yesterday to the NCSG point person on the issue. As no other SG has yet posted any assignment-related information, we are posting to the Council list in the hope of facilitating Council completion of the assignment process in the previously agreed upon timeframe.
K
participants (7)
-
Avri Doria -
Avri Doria -
Gomes, Chuck -
Philip Sheppard -
Rosette, Kristina -
Stéphane Van Gelder -
William Drake