AW: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010
We have a very uncomfortable situation: - applications have to be accepted until 29 July (2 weeks extension) - to whatever SO/AC they are related. That's what yestarday's announcement update says. And any candidate can rely on this since it was community wide published. - I assume this happened in accordance with the selectors since they're the masters of the overall process. My personal opinion is that therefore the selectors should take the burden of this confusion and shift the announcement of the RT members. 1 week shift is a minimum, 2 weeks would be satisfactory. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben Deutsche Telekom AG Wolf-Ulrich Knoben Heinrich-Hertz-Str. 3-7 D - 64295 Darmstadt +49 2244 873999 (Tel.) +49 2151 5300 5206 (PC-Fax) +49 151 1452 5867 (Mobil) http://www.telekom.com <http://www.telekom.com/> Deutsche Telekom AG Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender) Timotheus Höttges (stellvertretender Vorsitzender) Hamid Akhavan, Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Guido Kerkhoff, Thomas Sattelberger Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE50478376 _____ Von: owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Tonyarholmes@btinternet.com Gesendet: Freitag, 16. Juli 2010 08:25 An: 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'Marilyn Cade'; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; 'Steve Metalitz'; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; 'Harris, Anthony' Betreff: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Just to add that as Chair of the ISPCP I'll also be formally objecting to the fact that the extension does not apply to the GNSO candidates. This is totally unacceptable. Chuck - You make the point that the issue of 2 or 4 reps must be dealt with as a separate issue. If that's the case, by the same token so must the issue of the timetable for GNSO endorsement. As a minimum any decision on this must require council support, its' far too big an issue for an arbitrary decision by the council chair. This activity gets to the very heart of ICANN's future. Regards Tony From: owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: 15 July 2010 23:14 To: Marilyn Cade; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; Steve Metalitz; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; Tony Holmes; Harris, Anthony Subject: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Marilyn, I'm shocked as well Marilyn but for very different reasons than you. The rationale for my decision is really very simple. This extension was made without consultation with the GNSO and without any consideration of the approved GNSO endorsement process. Once I found out about it (today after the Council meeting, on the last day of the application period), I asked one simple question: will the deadline for GNSO endorsements be extended by the same amount of time? I was told no; GNSO endorsements are still do the end of August. The Council approved a process that gives SGs 21 days to to perform their endorsement processes and then allows time for the Council in consultation with its respective groups. We were given 45 days for our process; with the extension we would have two days and we don't have a Council meeting scheduled until the middle of September. I can see no way to make that work. If the time to execute the process was extended by the same number of days as the application period, which I assumed was the right thing to do, I would not have reacted the way I did. Normally, I would have at least consulted on the Council list before acting; in this case I made the judgment that any more delays would just add to the confusion and seriously hinder our ability to meet the end of August deadline. I am not a aware of a GNSO policy council. I assume you mean the GNSO Council that is tasked with managing the policy development process. I also believe that having 4 reps on the SSR RT is important, but that is a separate issue. I sent a message off in that regard to the selectors this morning. Feel free to send any letter you like. I think it would be good for the Board to know how this came about because it was totally unacceptable. Chuck From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 5:49 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; Steve Metalitz; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; Tony Holmes; Harris, Anthony Subject: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Chuck, while I NOTE your 'notice' on this topic,I strongly object to your decision. I have no idea why this is viewed as acceptable. It is not acceptable to my constituency. Frankly, the GNSO poiicy council should have been spending time on advocating to change the number of reps from the GNSO [as an SO] from 2 to 4, as all of us believe is critically important. I have seen no energy on that front and that disappoints me. Instead, I am seeing this notice from you, as chair of the policy council, that surprises me, and actually, shocks me. and, I guess, disappoints me. There is a notice of an extension. I sent that out immediately. It is broadly distributed in the business community. I told people of the extension. Where has your decision come from? an edict from ICANN? If so, then this needs to be made public, and the leaders of the SGs need to be engaged. Let's sort through this and why this can't be accepted. the extension has to be applied to all. All of us are, in the community of leadership in the SGs are working hard to work with the gnso policy council, but to see an announcement from the chair of the policy council that suggests that the extension does not apply to GNSO candidates is mystifying, confusing and cannot be supported by the BC chair. upon receipt of the extension, like any good chair of a constituency, and executive member of a SG, I distributed the ICANN staff announcement about an extension to the BC and other leadership of CSG. I advised my constituency and others of the extension. I could say: I just don't get it. What is the process to decide that an extension that is announced does not apply to the GNSO candidates? I have no idea what you mean by "unless notified to the contrary", but it must be a code for something. Please call me at 202 252 6787 on my cell. At this point, I am writing a letter of concern to the full Board that this extension which is now publicly available, is denied to GNSO candidates. Fill me in on why I should not send that letter. You can call my cell at 202 251 6787. Marilyn Cade BC Chair
Subject: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:11:39 -0400 From: cgomes@verisign.com To: Glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org
Unless further notified to the contrary, this extension will not apply to GNSO candidates. The deadline for candidates requesting GNSO endorsements remains today, 15 July.
Chuck Gomes GNSO Council Chair
-----Original Message----- From: owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- liaison6c@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 3:39 PM To: liaison6c Subject: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-01jun10-en.htm
EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member
- Review Team 2: Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS - - Review Team 4: WHOIS Policy -
Updated: 15 July 2010 13 July 2010 1 July 2010 1 June 2010
Deadline: 15 July 2010 - 23.59 UTC
Extended to: 29 July 2010 - 23.59 UTC
The Affirmation of Commitments calls for a periodic review of four key ICANN objectives, namely:
1. Ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of global Internet users; 2. Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; 3. Promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice; 4. WHOIS policy.
Affirmation reviews are to be performed by Review Teams composed of volunteer community Members representing the relevant Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees of ICANN. Please refer to the Affirmation Reviews web space for full reference.
ICANN now invites interested individuals to apply for a position of volunteer Review Team Member on the following Review Teams:
* Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; * WHOIS policy.
This call is solely intended for interested individuals who wish to apply in representation of a Supporting Organization (SO) or Advisory Committee (AC). Candidatures to serve as independent experts will not be considered.
Please download the full text of this Call for Applicants [PDF, 101 KB], which contains further instructions and information on the application procedure for interested candidates.
Interested candidates, please submit your CV, letter of motivation and SO/AC requirements (if applicable) to rtcandidatures@icann.org by 29 July 2010 - 23:59 UTC. SO/AC requirements may be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/call-for-applicants-2-and- 4-en.htm
Launch dates and deadlines:
* 29 July 2010 --> Publication of the list of volunteers * End of August 2010 --> Endorsement by SO/ACs * First week of September 2010 --> Selectors announce the RT Members
Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org
Hi On Jul 16, 2010, at 10:26 AM, <KnobenW@telekom.de> <KnobenW@telekom.de> wrote:
We have a very uncomfortable situation:
- applications have to be accepted until 29 July (2 weeks extension) - to whatever SO/AC they are related. That's what yestarday's announcement update says. And any candidate can rely on this since it was community wide published.
I agree with Wolf. While I understand why Chuck's proposed approach might have seemed like a way out of the timing bind, it doesn't work. People make decisions based on official ICANN pronouncements, and I know of at least one person who's preparing to apply but saw the message saying there's two more weeks and hence decided not to rush in his app yesterday. There may be others in the same boat. I don't think we can now pull the rug out from under them and say, well ICANN says you have time, but the GNSO Council says you don't. Moreover, the Council didn't discuss this and come to a decision, and I'm not clear on whether it'd be within our remit to override ICANN's announcement in the first place…?
- I assume this happened in accordance with the selectors since they're the masters of the overall process.
My personal opinion is that therefore the selectors should take the burden of this confusion and shift the announcement of the RT members. 1 week shift is a minimum, 2 weeks would be satisfactory.
This seems preferable, but if they cannot or will not, the other solution would be for SG's to take less than 21 days to agree amongst themselves on endorsements from the rather small applicant pools. In any event, applicants from SGs that do not need this long should not be penalized by changes based on that time frame. Best, Bill
I endorse Wolf's opinion: the selectors should take the burden of this confusion and shift the announcement of the RT members Jaime Wagner CGI (Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil) Representante dos Provedores de Acesso e Conteúdo jaime <mailto:jaime@corp.plugin.com.br> @cgi.br <mailto:jaime@cgi.br> (51)8126-0916 j.w@gner.net.br De: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] Em nome de KnobenW@telekom.de Enviada em: sexta-feira, 16 de julho de 2010 05:26 Para: tonyarholmes@btinternet.com; cgomes@verisign.com; marilynscade@hotmail.com; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; met@msk.com; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; harris@cabase.org.ar Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Assunto: [council] AW: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 We have a very uncomfortable situation: - applications have to be accepted until 29 July (2 weeks extension) - to whatever SO/AC they are related. That's what yestarday's announcement update says. And any candidate can rely on this since it was community wide published. - I assume this happened in accordance with the selectors since they're the masters of the overall process. My personal opinion is that therefore the selectors should take the burden of this confusion and shift the announcement of the RT members. 1 week shift is a minimum, 2 weeks would be satisfactory. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben Deutsche Telekom AG Wolf-Ulrich Knoben Heinrich-Hertz-Str. 3-7 D - 64295 Darmstadt +49 2244 873999 (Tel.) +49 2151 5300 5206 (PC-Fax) +49 151 1452 5867 (Mobil) http://www.telekom.com <http://www.telekom.com/> Deutsche Telekom AG Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender) Timotheus Höttges (stellvertretender Vorsitzender) Hamid Akhavan, Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Guido Kerkhoff, Thomas Sattelberger Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE50478376 _____ Von: owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Tonyarholmes@btinternet.com Gesendet: Freitag, 16. Juli 2010 08:25 An: 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'Marilyn Cade'; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; 'Steve Metalitz'; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; 'Harris, Anthony' Betreff: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Just to add that as Chair of the ISPCP Ill also be formally objecting to the fact that the extension does not apply to the GNSO candidates. This is totally unacceptable. Chuck You make the point that the issue of 2 or 4 reps must be dealt with as a separate issue. If thats the case, by the same token so must the issue of the timetable for GNSO endorsement. As a minimum any decision on this must require council support, its far too big an issue for an arbitrary decision by the council chair. This activity gets to the very heart of ICANNs future. Regards Tony From: owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: 15 July 2010 23:14 To: Marilyn Cade; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; Steve Metalitz; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; Tony Holmes; Harris, Anthony Subject: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Marilyn, Im shocked as well Marilyn but for very different reasons than you. The rationale for my decision is really very simple. This extension was made without consultation with the GNSO and without any consideration of the approved GNSO endorsement process. Once I found out about it (today after the Council meeting, on the last day of the application period), I asked one simple question: will the deadline for GNSO endorsements be extended by the same amount of time? I was told no; GNSO endorsements are still do the end of August. The Council approved a process that gives SGs 21 days to to perform their endorsement processes and then allows time for the Council in consultation with its respective groups. We were given 45 days for our process; with the extension we would have two days and we dont have a Council meeting scheduled until the middle of September. I can see no way to make that work. If the time to execute the process was extended by the same number of days as the application period, which I assumed was the right thing to do, I would not have reacted the way I did. Normally, I would have at least consulted on the Council list before acting; in this case I made the judgment that any more delays would just add to the confusion and seriously hinder our ability to meet the end of August deadline. I am not a aware of a GNSO policy council. I assume you mean the GNSO Council that is tasked with managing the policy development process. I also believe that having 4 reps on the SSR RT is important, but that is a separate issue. I sent a message off in that regard to the selectors this morning. Feel free to send any letter you like. I think it would be good for the Board to know how this came about because it was totally unacceptable. Chuck From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 5:49 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; Steve Metalitz; cdigangi@inta.org; sarah.b.deutsch@verizon.com; Tony Holmes; Harris, Anthony Subject: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Chuck, while I NOTE your 'notice' on this topic,I strongly object to your decision. I have no idea why this is viewed as acceptable. It is not acceptable to my constituency. Frankly, the GNSO poiicy council should have been spending time on advocating to change the number of reps from the GNSO [as an SO] from 2 to 4, as all of us believe is critically important. I have seen no energy on that front and that disappoints me. Instead, I am seeing this notice from you, as chair of the policy council, that surprises me, and actually, shocks me. and, I guess, disappoints me. There is a notice of an extension. I sent that out immediately. It is broadly distributed in the business community. I told people of the extension. Where has your decision come from? an edict from ICANN? If so, then this needs to be made public, and the leaders of the SGs need to be engaged. Let's sort through this and why this can't be accepted. the extension has to be applied to all. All of us are, in the community of leadership in the SGs are working hard to work with the gnso policy council, but to see an announcement from the chair of the policy council that suggests that the extension does not apply to GNSO candidates is mystifying, confusing and cannot be supported by the BC chair. upon receipt of the extension, like any good chair of a constituency, and executive member of a SG, I distributed the ICANN staff announcement about an extension to the BC and other leadership of CSG. I advised my constituency and others of the extension. I could say: I just don't get it. What is the process to decide that an extension that is announced does not apply to the GNSO candidates? I have no idea what you mean by "unless notified to the contrary", but it must be a code for something. Please call me at 202 252 6787 on my cell. At this point, I am writing a letter of concern to the full Board that this extension which is now publicly available, is denied to GNSO candidates. Fill me in on why I should not send that letter. You can call my cell at 202 251 6787. Marilyn Cade BC Chair
Subject: RE: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010 Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:11:39 -0400 From: cgomes@verisign.com To: Glen@icann.org; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org
Unless further notified to the contrary, this extension will not apply to GNSO candidates. The deadline for candidates requesting GNSO endorsements remains today, 15 July.
Chuck Gomes GNSO Council Chair
-----Original Message----- From: owner-liaison6c@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- liaison6c@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 3:39 PM To: liaison6c Subject: [liaison6c] EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member - 29 July 2010
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-01jun10-en.htm
EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member
- Review Team 2: Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS - - Review Team 4: WHOIS Policy -
Updated: 15 July 2010 13 July 2010 1 July 2010 1 June 2010
Deadline: 15 July 2010 - 23.59 UTC
Extended to: 29 July 2010 - 23.59 UTC
The Affirmation of Commitments calls for a periodic review of four key ICANN objectives, namely:
1. Ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of global Internet users; 2. Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; 3. Promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice; 4. WHOIS policy.
Affirmation reviews are to be performed by Review Teams composed of volunteer community Members representing the relevant Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees of ICANN. Please refer to the Affirmation Reviews web space for full reference.
ICANN now invites interested individuals to apply for a position of volunteer Review Team Member on the following Review Teams:
* Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; * WHOIS policy.
This call is solely intended for interested individuals who wish to apply in representation of a Supporting Organization (SO) or Advisory Committee (AC). Candidatures to serve as independent experts will not be considered.
Please download the full text of this Call for Applicants [PDF, 101 KB], which contains further instructions and information on the application procedure for interested candidates.
Interested candidates, please submit your CV, letter of motivation and SO/AC requirements (if applicable) to rtcandidatures@icann.org by 29 July 2010 - 23:59 UTC. SO/AC requirements may be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/call-for-applicants-2-and- 4-en.htm
Launch dates and deadlines:
* 29 July 2010 --> Publication of the list of volunteers * End of August 2010 --> Endorsement by SO/ACs * First week of September 2010 --> Selectors announce the RT Members
Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org
participants (3)
-
Jaime Wagner - CGI -
KnobenW＠telekom.de -
William Drake