All, Please see attached for a draft request for appointment of members and liaisons to the CSC. Supporting documents to this request is also attached i.e. as follows: - CSC candidates qualification requirements and - CSC scope and responsibilities. These materials have been developed by ICANN staff in collaboration with Donna Austin and Katrina Sataki, then subsequently reviewed by the IOTF group. If you have any concerns or suggested amendments, please do provide them as a matter of urgency and, in any event, no later than 16h00 UTC on Friday 26/05/2016. Thank-you for your consideration. Lise and Jonathan
Hello, Just a quick one on the diversity: Unless the applicant pool does not allow, candidates should not all come from the same geographical region (Europe; Asia/Australia/Pacific; Latin America/Caribbean islands; Africa; and North America), or be of the same gender. SO: While the above is practical with representative that have more than one member, i don't think it applies to all. So i suggest rewording as "Unless the applicant pool *and open seat* does not allow..." It should be noted that when approving the final composition of the CSC membership, which includes members and liaisons, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will consider diversity in making their determination. SO: Does the last sentence imply that nominations from other members can be rejected by the DUO and that it can be rejected on grounds of diversity as well? So the DUO can say because we already have many female in the CSC we don't accept the single female nomination made by ALAC. I don't think that should be the intent at all. Regards On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see attached for a draft request for appointment of members and liaisons to the CSC.
Supporting documents to this request is also attached i.e. as follows:
- CSC candidates qualification requirements and
- CSC scope and responsibilities.
These materials have been developed by ICANN staff in collaboration with Donna Austin and Katrina Sataki, then subsequently reviewed by the IOTF group.
If you have any concerns or suggested amendments, please do provide them as a matter of urgency and, in any event, no later than 16h00 UTC on Friday 26/05/2016.
Thank-you for your consideration.
Lise and Jonathan
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Hi Seun In response to your suggestion and question, I propose that the text in question be removed and replace with the following: The Membership Selection Process of the CSC Charter calls for due consideration to be given, to the extent possible, to form a CSC that has diversity in terms of geography and skill set. To that end the composition of the slate will be reviewed during two points in the selection process: firstly by the RySG and ccNSO and secondly by the ccNSO and GNSO. To your point about candidates being rejected: this is not the intention. However, given that each SO/AC will be nominating candidates individually there is a possibility that the full slate could be without diversity in terms of skill set and geography, so a step has been built into the process to address this situation should it eventuate. It is also recommended that each SO/AC provide a preferred and secondary candidate for consideration. I hope this response addresses your concerns. Thanks Donna From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Seun Ojedeji Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 2:07 AM To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials Hello, Just a quick one on the diversity: Unless the applicant pool does not allow, candidates should not all come from the same geographical region (Europe; Asia/Australia/Pacific; Latin America/Caribbean islands; Africa; and North America), or be of the same gender. SO: While the above is practical with representative that have more than one member, i don't think it applies to all. So i suggest rewording as "Unless the applicant pool and open seat does not allow..." It should be noted that when approving the final composition of the CSC membership, which includes members and liaisons, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will consider diversity in making their determination. SO: Does the last sentence imply that nominations from other members can be rejected by the DUO and that it can be rejected on grounds of diversity as well? So the DUO can say because we already have many female in the CSC we don't accept the single female nomination made by ALAC. I don't think that should be the intent at all. Regards On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> wrote: All, Please see attached for a draft request for appointment of members and liaisons to the CSC. Supporting documents to this request is also attached i.e. as follows: - CSC candidates qualification requirements and - CSC scope and responsibilities. These materials have been developed by ICANN staff in collaboration with Donna Austin and Katrina Sataki, then subsequently reviewed by the IOTF group. If you have any concerns or suggested amendments, please do provide them as a matter of urgency and, in any event, no later than 16h00 UTC on Friday 26/05/2016. Thank-you for your consideration. Lise and Jonathan _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=DQMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=DciiyvwMaH5uUZoJUZm3j6xCf2ayFPcDFYFyFsGvSec&s=x_FnrDQseh8QC2h6YTY7zb4cVQDo_pcfs26tCilVQQk&e=> -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=DQMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=DciiyvwMaH5uUZoJUZm3j6xCf2ayFPcDFYFyFsGvSec&s=oF_6nlKffyTjkPc7UQiPFraonnSN2me_MTrhaAuOpJ8&e=> Mobile: +2348035233535 alt email: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__goog-5F1872880453&d=DQMF...> seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng<mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Hi Donna,
From your proposed text, is there a reason why the second phase is not maintained as RySG?
As to the representation, yeah having SO/AC provide an alternate to each of their seat could work. At the same time, it could be difficult for some SO/AC to get two good people that wish to volunteer. However I guess it's fine to give it a try (I expect the process can be reviewed by members in a flexible manner) Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 26 May 2016 6:10 p.m., "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz> wrote:
Hi Seun
In response to your suggestion and question, I propose that the text in question be removed and replace with the following:
*The Membership Selection Process of the CSC Charter calls for due consideration to be given, to the extent possible, to form a CSC that has diversity in terms of geography and skill set. To that end the composition of the slate will be reviewed during two points in the selection process: firstly by the RySG and ccNSO and secondly by the ccNSO and GNSO. *
To your point about candidates being rejected: this is not the intention. However, given that each SO/AC will be nominating candidates individually there is a possibility that the full slate could be without diversity in terms of skill set and geography, so a step has been built into the process to address this situation should it eventuate. It is also recommended that each SO/AC provide a preferred and secondary candidate for consideration.
I hope this response addresses your concerns.
Thanks
Donna
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Seun Ojedeji *Sent:* Wednesday, May 25, 2016 2:07 AM *To:* Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> *Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials
Hello,
Just a quick one on the diversity:
Unless the applicant pool does not allow, candidates should not all come from the same
geographical region (Europe; Asia/Australia/Pacific; Latin America/Caribbean islands; Africa;
and North America), or be of the same gender.
SO: While the above is practical with representative that have more than one member, i don't think it applies to all. So i suggest rewording as "Unless the applicant pool *and open seat* does not allow..."
It should be noted that when approving the final composition of the CSC membership, which includes members and liaisons, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will consider diversity in making their determination.
SO: Does the last sentence imply that nominations from other members can be rejected by the DUO and that it can be rejected on grounds of diversity as well? So the DUO can say because we already have many female in the CSC we don't accept the single female nomination made by ALAC. I don't think that should be the intent at all.
Regards
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see attached for a draft request for appointment of members and liaisons to the CSC.
Supporting documents to this request is also attached i.e. as follows:
- CSC candidates qualification requirements and
- CSC scope and responsibilities.
These materials have been developed by ICANN staff in collaboration with Donna Austin and Katrina Sataki, then subsequently reviewed by the IOTF group.
If you have any concerns or suggested amendments, please do provide them as a matter of urgency and, in any event, no later than 16h00 UTC on Friday 26/05/2016.
Thank-you for your consideration.
Lise and Jonathan
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_li...>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: * *http://www.fuoye.edu.ng* <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=DQMFa...> *Mobile: +2348035233535 <%2B2348035233535>* *alt email:* <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__goog-5F1872880453&d=DQMF...> *seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng* <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Hi Seun Sorry for the delay in responding. To be honest I can't recall exactly the reasoning (maybe Martin does), but I think it was a recognition that the overall slate needed approval beyond the RySG, and we felt it more appropriate that this be done by both the GNSO and ccNSO Councils. It's important to remember that the Liaison positions are not mandatory, with the exception of the Liaison to be provided by IANA. So, each SO/AC is not obligated to provide candidates. The CSC Charter will be reviewed after the CSC has been in operation for 12 months so it is possible that the selection process could be revisited at that time. Thanks Donna From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 10:54 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org; trang.nguyen@icann.org; Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials Hi Donna,
From your proposed text, is there a reason why the second phase is not maintained as RySG?
As to the representation, yeah having SO/AC provide an alternate to each of their seat could work. At the same time, it could be difficult for some SO/AC to get two good people that wish to volunteer. However I guess it's fine to give it a try (I expect the process can be reviewed by members in a flexible manner) Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 26 May 2016 6:10 p.m., "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz<mailto:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>> wrote: Hi Seun In response to your suggestion and question, I propose that the text in question be removed and replace with the following: The Membership Selection Process of the CSC Charter calls for due consideration to be given, to the extent possible, to form a CSC that has diversity in terms of geography and skill set. To that end the composition of the slate will be reviewed during two points in the selection process: firstly by the RySG and ccNSO and secondly by the ccNSO and GNSO. To your point about candidates being rejected: this is not the intention. However, given that each SO/AC will be nominating candidates individually there is a possibility that the full slate could be without diversity in terms of skill set and geography, so a step has been built into the process to address this situation should it eventuate. It is also recommended that each SO/AC provide a preferred and secondary candidate for consideration. I hope this response addresses your concerns. Thanks Donna From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Seun Ojedeji Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 2:07 AM To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials Hello, Just a quick one on the diversity: Unless the applicant pool does not allow, candidates should not all come from the same geographical region (Europe; Asia/Australia/Pacific; Latin America/Caribbean islands; Africa; and North America), or be of the same gender. SO: While the above is practical with representative that have more than one member, i don't think it applies to all. So i suggest rewording as "Unless the applicant pool and open seat does not allow..." It should be noted that when approving the final composition of the CSC membership, which includes members and liaisons, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will consider diversity in making their determination. SO: Does the last sentence imply that nominations from other members can be rejected by the DUO and that it can be rejected on grounds of diversity as well? So the DUO can say because we already have many female in the CSC we don't accept the single female nomination made by ALAC. I don't think that should be the intent at all. Regards On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> wrote: All, Please see attached for a draft request for appointment of members and liaisons to the CSC. Supporting documents to this request is also attached i.e. as follows: - CSC candidates qualification requirements and - CSC scope and responsibilities. These materials have been developed by ICANN staff in collaboration with Donna Austin and Katrina Sataki, then subsequently reviewed by the IOTF group. If you have any concerns or suggested amendments, please do provide them as a matter of urgency and, in any event, no later than 16h00 UTC on Friday 26/05/2016. Thank-you for your consideration. Lise and Jonathan _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=DQMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=DciiyvwMaH5uUZoJUZm3j6xCf2ayFPcDFYFyFsGvSec&s=x_FnrDQseh8QC2h6YTY7zb4cVQDo_pcfs26tCilVQQk&e=> -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=DQMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=DciiyvwMaH5uUZoJUZm3j6xCf2ayFPcDFYFyFsGvSec&s=oF_6nlKffyTjkPc7UQiPFraonnSN2me_MTrhaAuOpJ8&e=> Mobile: +2348035233535<tel:%2B2348035233535> alt email: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__goog-5F1872880453&d=DQMF...> seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng<mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Hi Seun, I think Donna's memory is good. There might have been some need for equivalence - that the CSC is an instrument of the Councils as representatives of the customers, which automatically is the case for the ccNSO. You will note that escalation goes through the Councils, so I think that also is a good reason for appointments to be made by the Councils. Hope this helps Martin From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: 31 May 2016 19:54 To: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials Hi Seun Sorry for the delay in responding. To be honest I can't recall exactly the reasoning (maybe Martin does), but I think it was a recognition that the overall slate needed approval beyond the RySG, and we felt it more appropriate that this be done by both the GNSO and ccNSO Councils. It's important to remember that the Liaison positions are not mandatory, with the exception of the Liaison to be provided by IANA. So, each SO/AC is not obligated to provide candidates. The CSC Charter will be reviewed after the CSC has been in operation for 12 months so it is possible that the selection process could be revisited at that time. Thanks Donna From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 10:54 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz<mailto:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; trang.nguyen@icann.org<mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org>; Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials Hi Donna,
From your proposed text, is there a reason why the second phase is not maintained as RySG?
As to the representation, yeah having SO/AC provide an alternate to each of their seat could work. At the same time, it could be difficult for some SO/AC to get two good people that wish to volunteer. However I guess it's fine to give it a try (I expect the process can be reviewed by members in a flexible manner) Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 26 May 2016 6:10 p.m., "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz<mailto:Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>> wrote: Hi Seun In response to your suggestion and question, I propose that the text in question be removed and replace with the following: The Membership Selection Process of the CSC Charter calls for due consideration to be given, to the extent possible, to form a CSC that has diversity in terms of geography and skill set. To that end the composition of the slate will be reviewed during two points in the selection process: firstly by the RySG and ccNSO and secondly by the ccNSO and GNSO. To your point about candidates being rejected: this is not the intention. However, given that each SO/AC will be nominating candidates individually there is a possibility that the full slate could be without diversity in terms of skill set and geography, so a step has been built into the process to address this situation should it eventuate. It is also recommended that each SO/AC provide a preferred and secondary candidate for consideration. I hope this response addresses your concerns. Thanks Donna From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Seun Ojedeji Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 2:07 AM To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CSC Materials Hello, Just a quick one on the diversity: Unless the applicant pool does not allow, candidates should not all come from the same geographical region (Europe; Asia/Australia/Pacific; Latin America/Caribbean islands; Africa; and North America), or be of the same gender. SO: While the above is practical with representative that have more than one member, i don't think it applies to all. So i suggest rewording as "Unless the applicant pool and open seat does not allow..." It should be noted that when approving the final composition of the CSC membership, which includes members and liaisons, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will consider diversity in making their determination. SO: Does the last sentence imply that nominations from other members can be rejected by the DUO and that it can be rejected on grounds of diversity as well? So the DUO can say because we already have many female in the CSC we don't accept the single female nomination made by ALAC. I don't think that should be the intent at all. Regards On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> wrote: All, Please see attached for a draft request for appointment of members and liaisons to the CSC. Supporting documents to this request is also attached i.e. as follows: - CSC candidates qualification requirements and - CSC scope and responsibilities. These materials have been developed by ICANN staff in collaboration with Donna Austin and Katrina Sataki, then subsequently reviewed by the IOTF group. If you have any concerns or suggested amendments, please do provide them as a matter of urgency and, in any event, no later than 16h00 UTC on Friday 26/05/2016. Thank-you for your consideration. Lise and Jonathan _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=DQMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=DciiyvwMaH5uUZoJUZm3j6xCf2ayFPcDFYFyFsGvSec&s=x_FnrDQseh8QC2h6YTY7zb4cVQDo_pcfs26tCilVQQk&e=> -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=DQMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=DciiyvwMaH5uUZoJUZm3j6xCf2ayFPcDFYFyFsGvSec&s=oF_6nlKffyTjkPc7UQiPFraonnSN2me_MTrhaAuOpJ8&e=> Mobile: +2348035233535<tel:%2B2348035233535> alt email: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__goog-5F1872880453&d=DQMF...> seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng<mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
participants (4)
-
Austin, Donna -
Jonathan Robinson -
Martin Boyle -
Seun Ojedeji