Dear Tapani,
I echo the messages of both Vicky and Wolf-Ulrich. Heather enjoys the support of the Business Constituency, and we look forward to working with you on Vice Chair selection in the spirit of goodwill that shaped the agreed upon rules.
Best regards,
Barbara Wanner
BC Representative to the CSG
-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Victoria Sheckler
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 7:25 AM
To: Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Chair nominee for 2018?
Yes. Heather has full CSG support. She has done an admirable job as vice chair, and I'm sure will approach the Chair with the same dedication, fairness and leadership. I hope our house will be able to give Heather their full support as the CSG has given its full support for her. I agree with Wolf-Ulrich's approach re: vice chair, and look forward to working with you collaboratively on that. Regards, Vicky, VP for IPC
-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 6:28 AM
To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Chair nominee for 2018?
Hi Tapani,
there is full support to Heather's nomination pointed out by all CSG constituencies. We would appreciate to hear about the NCSG's position as soon as possible.
I suggest exchanging views on the vicechair election should follow after your SG has decided their position with regards to the chair election.
Here the recently agreed rules are the basis for further steps.
With best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
Am 29.09.2017 um 09:22 schrieb Tapani Tarvainen:
> Hi Greg,
>
> After the call with Heather last night (it was midnight my time
> anyway) things are moving forward so that Rafik Dammak (who's chair of
> NCSG's Policy Committee, which decides appointments and endorsements)
> is talking with Heather and will bring his recommendation to the PC.
>
> Depending on how that goes NCSG may either agree to endorse Heather or
> not, and if not whether or not we'll offer an NCSG councillor for the
> position or just choose "Not Heather" as you put it.
>
> But we were under the impression that Heather has CSG's support.
>
> If that is not the case - if that "technically premature" implies
> anything but a technical formality, and in particular if CSG decides
> *not* to endorse Heather it will obviously change the situation. So it
> would be helpful if CSG's position here was clarified as soon as possible.
>
> Tapani
>
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 02:15:30AM -0400, Greg Shatan (gregshatanipc@gmail.com) wrote:
>> It seems like we (NCPH) find ourselves with very little time and no
>> agreed process for dealing with the GNSO Chair nomination to be made by the NCPH.
>> With the dawning realization that the NCPH nominee is due *October 2
>> (Monday)*, this has gone from a lurking "to do" all the way to fire drill.
>> And as with most fire drill projects, it seems that things are not
>> going as smoothly as one would hope.
>>
>> It probably isn't fruitful to try and figure out why and how we find
>> ourselves here -- with no formal process before September (when
>> Council elections would reveal the candidate pool) and no ad hoc
>> process (if it can be called that) before this week. Between
>> volunteer burnout, multitasking, "real job" pressures (for those of
>> us whose real job isn't ICANN-related real job), and "real life"
>> pressures (and I hope all of us have a non-ICANN-related real life),
>> etc., there's ample explanation without trying to decide if any
>> person/people did or didn't do something they shouldn't or should
>> have done. This may be time to pull out the old line, "Mistakes were made," and move on from there.
>>
>> Hopefully, when the dust settles, this can be a cautionary tale for
>> the "new" NCPH leadership and we (they) can fix this before it
>> becomes next year's messy fire drill.
>>
>> In the meantime, we have to deal with the fire drill. We don't have
>> much time (and, personally, I will be largely off-line from
>> Pre-sundown Friday to Post-sundown Saturday (New York time)).
>>
>> I understand that it is now clear to the NCSG that Heather Forrest
>> has "thrown her hat in the ring." I'm fairly certain that there is
>> no other candidate from the CSG (but the CSG Excomm is also behind in
>> its process of considering the GNSO Chair issue, so it would be
>> technically premature to say that Heather has the CSG endorsement).
>> If there is no NCSG Councilor throwing their hat in the ring, then
>> this is a bit easier. The choice would be Heather or "not Heather."
>> Of course, we don't even have a process to deal with that choice....
>>
>> If there is someone from NCSG who is interested, then it gets a bit
>> harder, though at this point I don't know how CSG would consider
>> another candidate between now and Monday. I suppose CSG would do
>> what it had to do, in the spirit of collaboration and muddling
>> through, to consider an NCSG candidate if there was one.
>>
>> So, where do we stand?]
>> -- We could ask for an extension of a few days so our hair is not
>> completely on fire.
>> -- Heather has sort of kick-started the (non)process, in the absence
>> of "NCPH Excomm" action. Messy, but waiting until the clock ran down
>> seems like a worse alternative.
>> -- the NCSG has met with Heather.
>> -- CSG Excomm is discussing Heather.
>>
>> Where do we go from here? I'm not sure we have enough information
>> yet to know (i.e., is there one potential candidate or two?). The
>> Vice Chair process (which is essentially a turn-taking process, with
>> some safety
>> valves) doesn't really transfer well here, especially in an ad hoc
>> one-off context. So, regardless of the number of candidates, we don't
>> have a method for settling on a candidate (or even a method for failing to do so).
>>
>> I suppose it should be said that nominating the candidate is only
>> that; it is not a pledge of votes in the actual election. (Perhaps,
>> in a different world, the NCPH candidate would get the NCPH votes,
>> but we are not in that
>> world....)
>>
>> It's late here, and I am out of ideas, so I will ask for some
>> thoughts from the rest of the list about next steps.
>>
>> Thanks for reading this far,
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <
>> ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, this list is clearly appropriate for discussing things that
>>> should be done by NCPH.
>>>
>>> Not many things but important ones. Off the top of my head:
>>>
>>> (1) Electing Board member 14.
>>> (2) Electing NCPH Vice Chair for the council.
>>> (3) Nominating NCPH candidate for council Chair election.
>>>
>>> The only one we have a process for now is the Vice Chair, which we
>>> hammered out in Hyderabad.
>>>
>>> Others are still done ad hoc. Like (2) being done right now.
>>>
>>> We really should have processes agreed on and written down for all
>>> of them, and this list looks like a good place to discuss them.
>>>
>>> By the way, as it happens I just yesterday asked Maryam Bakoshi to
>>> update the list: all NCPH councillors and stakeholder group and
>>> constituency leaders (ExComs and the like) should here. (I checked
>>> councillors and NCSG/NCUC/NPOC leadership; for CSG I'm not sure who
>>> all should be here, but I trust you can take care of your own.)
>>>
>>> Tapani
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 02:29:38PM -0400, Greg Shatan (
>>> gregshatanipc@gmail.com) wrote:
>>>> I think this would be the best place to confirm what we do have in
>>>> place, and what we don't. And then to decide what to do about it.
>>>>
>>>> Then there is the Vice Chair selection process to deal with as well....
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 11:20 AM, avri doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Just wondering, is this the place where the NCSG & CSG should be
>>>>> coordinating on how to move forward with the upcoming chair elections?
>>>>>
>>>>> Really trying to understand what process the NCPH has for doing
>>>>> this in a bottom up and inclusive manner.
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
>>> Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
> Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
_______________________________________________Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here.
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership