Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection
NCSG Leadership, I'm following up on Wolf-Ulrich's email below. Thanks! Greg On Monday, November 9, 2015, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
Hi David,
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Amr's email from Nov 06 indicated the NCSG's agreement to Heather's selection as VC from the NCPH - at least I did understand so. So I'm a little confused why a formal election should now take place. There is no need for the CSG to do so, I'm sure.
Please shed some light on the process.
Wolf-Ulrich
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: David Cake Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 7:21 PM To: Amr Elsadr Cc: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council ChairElections/Vice Chair Selection
Personally, speaking as a councillor, I'd like there to be at least some, however abbreviated, formal election for vice-chair. Ncsg councillors aren't bound, and I wouldn't want to presume how all will vote based on discussion.
Speaking as acting co-chair etc, planning for the next meeting is already fairly advanced, and while I appreciate Greg's understanding of how busy IGF can be, I'm sure I can keep up with planning. I'd think having the changeover at the conclusion of that meeting would be a practical point. Though I'd be happy to keep Heather in the loop, so to speak.
David
Sent from my iPad
On 9 Nov 2015, at 12:53 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote:
Hi,
Agreed. I don’t see any reason why we need to delay seating Heather as the council VC for the NCPH. I know that there are members of the GNSO Secretariat subscribed to this list, but if needed, we should reach out to Glen for some direction on how to move forward as expeditiously as possible.
Thanks.
Amr
On Nov 6, 2015, at 7:57 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
On a separate but related note, I am confident that we have consensus on placing Heather Forrest in the Vice Chair seat.
I would also like to congratulate Heather, and thank the NCSG for at least fulfilling that part of my slogan. :-) I think it's a good place for us as a House to be.
I also want to thank David for his (continuing) service, and for his poise and equanimity in riding the 48-hour rollercoaster he found himself on in Dublin.
A process question then, is when Heather should be seated as Vice Chair. There is an argument for doing it immediately, so that Heather can participate in the preparations for the next Council meeting and serve in that capacity at that meeting. I would also note that David will be attending IGF, in spite of the best efforts of the Brazilian Embassy in Canberra to thwart him, and thus will be somewhat stretched and stressed in the time prior to the next Council meeting. There's also an argument to be made for continuity, of course.
In my opinion, the balance of factors suggest that Heather should be seated sooner rather than later, and Glen should be informed that Heather will serve as Vice-Chair effective upon receipt of notification.
Thoughts?
Thanks!
Greg
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote: Acclamation may be procedurally and logistically awkward, and I am certainly not wedded to it. I think the general idea was to signal, if possible, that the Council and the community should not expect a replay of "None of the Above."
Nominating Bladel would have signaled that, but also would have signaled other things that some (if not all) of us did not want to signal.
A statement before the vote might have a similar (but more informal) effect.
I realize the NCSG, due to the "non-directed voting" rule, may have difficulty making any kind of statement before the vote, unless it was made by the NCSG Councilors. The CSG would have an easier time making such a statement (and might have more reason to do so, given the fallout in Dublin). We should consider whether any kind of (joint or several) statement(s) makes sense, or whether we should just let things move toward the vote. It may make sense to wait until after the GNSO Council meeting where James will speak once again with the Council. It may also make sense to see if our non-nomination is misconstrued, before making a statement (if any).
Greg
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Stephanie Perrin < stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca> wrote: Congratulations Heather, and thank you so much for your graciousness and willingness to serve in this capacity. Stephanie Perrin
On 2015-11-06 4:57, Heather Forrest wrote: Dear Amr, all,
I appreciate faith you've put in me to occupy the Vice Chair's position and will serve to the very best of my ability.
Best wishes,
Heather
________________________________________ From: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 20:11 To: Tony Holmes Cc: Heather Forrest; Greg Shatan; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection
Hi Greg and all,
Apologies about not responding to this in time to meet the nomination deadline. Time zones difference. If there are no objections, we could still submit the short statement that Greg drafted. It seems pretty factual and straight forward. Thanks for drafting it Greg, but if you could change the signatory for the NCSG to “Tapani Tarvainen - Chair, NCSG”, I’d appreciate it.
Apart from the letter, we’ve been discussing our other outstanding issues within the NCSG over the past few days. If we have been a bit slow in responding, it’s most likely because folks are prepping and travelling to the IGF (not me though).
First, the NCSG is very much looking forward to Heather Forrest taking over as the next Council Vice Chair from the NCPH. Thanks for your willingness to serve, Heather. We can communicate this decision (assuming that we have consensus) to Glen, so that Heather can be formally recognised prior to the next council meeting on November 19th.
Regarding the Council Chair elections, a number of NCSG councillors have voiced support for James, however, some concern was raised regarding the suggestion of replacing a vote with an acclamation. Procedurally, I’m not sure how it would be pulled off, as a candidate needs 60% of the votes from each house to be elected. This may indicate that a vote is necessary. It may also go to reason that if the candidate has the unanimous support of the council members, then (s)he would undoubtedly have the required 60% of votes of each house. I’m still not clear on the procedural bit though.
Another issue we have with “acclamation” is that, as you all know by now, the NCSG does not direct the votes of its councillors. I’ve heard from the majority of our councillors, but not all of them. Those who have spoken up have declared support for James. However, in the event that even one of our councillors may wish to vote the other way, I believe it would be appropriate to allow for that possibility. @Greg: Sorry if that messed up the slogan. :)
Thanks.
Amr
On Nov 6, 2015, at 10:20 AM, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes@btinternet.com> wrote:
+1
From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Heather Forrest Sent: 06 November 2015 00:11 To: Greg Shatan; Amr Elsadr Cc: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection
Dear Greg,
I'm pleased to support your text and the concept of notifying Glen for courtesy. This approach communicates more than what the mere words state, and I agree with that message.
Best wishes,
Heather
From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org < gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 9:29 To: Amr Elsadr Cc: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection
I think it would make sense for Marika to be sent formal notice that the NCPH has chosen not to nominate a candidate in this second round of elections. Otherwise, we run the risk that it looks like we forgot. Clearly that's the decision we've made, so we might as well look decisive, rather than forgetful.
There is no one person authorized to speak for the CSG (much less the NCPH). However, this needs to come from a member of one SG (email being what it is), but would look best signed by a representative of each SG.
I'm happy to send and sign on behalf of whoever is appropriate from the NCSG side. Or vice versa. Or it can come from any two appropriate people.
The text should be very simple. I propose (names are just placeholders):
The Non-Contracted Parties House has chosen not to to nominate a candidate for Chair of the GNSO Council.
Best Regards,
Greg Shatan President, IPC, for the Commercial Stakeholder Group Amr Elsadr Chair, NCSG Policy Committee, for the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote: Amr,
This is where I think the CSG stands (I'm sure I will be corrected by others on the list, if I get it wrong).
On the chair front, we have now had a conference call with James Bladel where we were able to speak at greater length with James. At this point, it seems unlikely (from the CSG point of view) that the NCPH would seek to nominate a candidate to oppose James (especially since CSG and NCSG haven't discussed the matter, and we are about 24 hours away from the deadline for nominations). Actually nominating James seems unlikely, at best. However, we have considered the possibility of suggesting that James be elected "by acclamation" rather than going to a ballot (if that is procedurally feasible).
On the Vice Chair front, I can confirm that Heather is more than willing to serve as Vice Chair, and the CSG fully supports Heather in that regard. Recognizing that we need to resolve the long-term issue of how to choose and/or rotate the VC slot between the SGs, it would be great if the CSG and NCSG could come together on Heather at this time.
Our possible campaign slogan: "Acclaim for James! Come Together on Heather!"
Greg
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote: Hi,
Reposting as it seems we may have had some new subscriptions to this list over-night.
Thanks.
Amr
On Nov 2, 2015, at 7:27 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote:
Hi all,
I’m hoping that by now, everybody who needs to be on this list is actually subscribed to it.
I was wondering if (and how) folks would like to begin a discussion on the next round of elections. The deadline to nominate candidates is on November 5th. Although the CPH hasn’t submitted a candidate yet, my understanding is that they plan on running James Bladel again.
During the council development session, we had discussed the possibility of trying to have a candidate by consensus, and only resorting to voting as a last resort. I’m not sure we can do this over the next few days, but would be happy to learn that we can. Hearing from others here seems like a reasonable first step to me.
We may also want to discuss the selection of a VC from the NCPH. My understanding is that Heather Forrest is willing to serve in this capacity. I would be grateful to hear thoughts on this as well.
Thanks.
Amr _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
Hi, These are my personal views on this, and I stand to be corrected by others:
On Nov 9, 2015, at 10:09 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
Hi David,
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Amr's email from Nov 06 indicated the NCSG's agreement to Heather's selection as VC from the NCPH - at least I did understand so. So I'm a little confused why a formal election should now take place. There is no need for the CSG to do so, I'm sure.
Please shed some light on the process.
Yes, the NCSG Policy Committee consisting of its 6 elected councillors and appointed members from each of the two NCSG constituencies has reached consensus on Heather’s selection as the NCPH's Vice Chair to the Council. In the absence of any requirement in the ICANN bylaws/GNSO Operating Procedures to hold formal elections or votes for a VC, this process should be sufficient and consistent with the PC’s role in the NCSG charter.
On Nov 9, 2015, at 8:21 PM, David Cake <dave@DIFFERENCE.COM.AU> wrote:
Personally, speaking as a councillor, I'd like there to be at least some, however abbreviated, formal election for vice-chair. Ncsg councillors aren't bound, and I wouldn't want to presume how all will vote based on discussion.
As above, I personally do not believe an election is necessary. The views of the (majority of) NCSG councillors were expressed during the NCSG Policy Committee. Enough support has been expressed for Heather’s candidacy as VC to achieve the PC’s required consensus level for an NCSG position.
Speaking as acting co-chair etc, planning for the next meeting is already fairly advanced, and while I appreciate Greg's understanding of how busy IGF can be, I'm sure I can keep up with planning. I'd think having the changeover at the conclusion of that meeting would be a practical point. Though I'd be happy to keep Heather in the loop, so to speak.
This is a different and unrelated issue. I don’t know enough about the discussions that take place among the council leadership team to prepare for meetings to have an informed opinion on the practicality of changing the VC one week before the council meeting. It is my belief, however, that it would be best to confirm the new VC’s appointment sooner rather than later. We’re already behind the traditional schedule. If Heather and David can work to make this happen, that’d be great. If not, then keeping Heather “in the loop” is certainly necessary regardless of when she will be taking over. In any case, I do not believe a formal election with ballots is necessary. Thanks. Amr
Thank you Amr for informing on the NCSG position. I also fully agree with your sooner rather than later transition, particulalry if Dave is busy with other activities. Best regards Carlos Raúl (Non voting & Houseless) On Nov 12, 2015 8:26 AM, "Amr Elsadr" <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote:
Hi,
These are my personal views on this, and I stand to be corrected by others:
On Nov 9, 2015, at 10:09 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
Hi David,
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Amr's email from Nov 06 indicated the NCSG's agreement to Heather's selection as VC from the NCPH - at least I did understand so. So I'm a little confused why a formal election should now take place. There is no need for the CSG to do so, I'm sure.
Please shed some light on the process.
Yes, the NCSG Policy Committee consisting of its 6 elected councillors and appointed members from each of the two NCSG constituencies has reached consensus on Heather’s selection as the NCPH's Vice Chair to the Council. In the absence of any requirement in the ICANN bylaws/GNSO Operating Procedures to hold formal elections or votes for a VC, this process should be sufficient and consistent with the PC’s role in the NCSG charter.
On Nov 9, 2015, at 8:21 PM, David Cake <dave@DIFFERENCE.COM.AU> wrote:
Personally, speaking as a councillor, I'd like there to be at least some, however abbreviated, formal election for vice-chair. Ncsg councillors aren't bound, and I wouldn't want to presume how all will vote based on discussion.
As above, I personally do not believe an election is necessary. The views of the (majority of) NCSG councillors were expressed during the NCSG Policy Committee. Enough support has been expressed for Heather’s candidacy as VC to achieve the PC’s required consensus level for an NCSG position.
Speaking as acting co-chair etc, planning for the next meeting is already fairly advanced, and while I appreciate Greg's understanding of how busy IGF can be, I'm sure I can keep up with planning. I'd think having the changeover at the conclusion of that meeting would be a practical point. Though I'd be happy to keep Heather in the loop, so to speak.
This is a different and unrelated issue. I don’t know enough about the discussions that take place among the council leadership team to prepare for meetings to have an informed opinion on the practicality of changing the VC one week before the council meeting. It is my belief, however, that it would be best to confirm the new VC’s appointment sooner rather than later. We’re already behind the traditional schedule. If Heather and David can work to make this happen, that’d be great. If not, then keeping Heather “in the loop” is certainly necessary regardless of when she will be taking over.
In any case, I do not believe a formal election with ballots is necessary.
Thanks.
Amr _______________________________________________ Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
On 12 Nov 2015, at 11:25 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote:
Hi,
These are my personal views on this, and I stand to be corrected by others:
On Nov 9, 2015, at 10:09 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
Hi David,
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Amr's email from Nov 06 indicated the NCSG's agreement to Heather's selection as VC from the NCPH - at least I did understand so. So I'm a little confused why a formal election should now take place. There is no need for the CSG to do so, I'm sure.
Please shed some light on the process.
Yes, the NCSG Policy Committee consisting of its 6 elected councillors and appointed members from each of the two NCSG constituencies has reached consensus on Heather’s selection as the NCPH's Vice Chair to the Council.
Which, as you know, does not bind any of the NCSG councillors (unless it chooses to do so, which we haven’t), and given the confusion on the issue.
In the absence of any requirement in the ICANN bylaws/GNSO Operating Procedures to hold formal elections or votes for a VC, this process should be sufficient and consistent with the PC’s role in the NCSG charter.
I would say that in the absence of any by law requirements, the NCPH is effectively a group of councillors (including one that is not part of either SG), in which the SGs have no formal role (though, of course, a huge informal role). My attitude is that, in the absence of any bylaws, we should go with the minimal formal procedure that definitely achieves the objective, rather than make up a procedure based on what we all happen to be comfortable with at the time. Because such ad hoc procedures, if the NCPH fails to settle on a procedure as we have for several years, will become confusing precedent. Lets simply make it formally clear.
On Nov 9, 2015, at 8:21 PM, David Cake <dave@DIFFERENCE.COM.AU> wrote:
Personally, speaking as a councillor, I'd like there to be at least some, however abbreviated, formal election for vice-chair. Ncsg councillors aren't bound, and I wouldn't want to presume how all will vote based on discussion.
As above, I personally do not believe an election is necessary. The views of the (majority of) NCSG councillors were expressed during the NCSG Policy Committee. Enough support has been expressed for Heather’s candidacy as VC to achieve the PC’s required consensus level for an NCSG position.
I believe the PC (and indeed, the SG) has no formal role in the selection of a councillor, in the absence of any rules at all. All I’m asking for is perhaps a vote of the NCPH councillors, in the absence of any other formal procedure. I expect that that vote will be unanimous, or at the least an overwhelming majority. It need not take more than, say, 48 hours at the outside.
Speaking as acting co-chair etc, planning for the next meeting is already fairly advanced, and while I appreciate Greg's understanding of how busy IGF can be, I'm sure I can keep up with planning. I'd think having the changeover at the conclusion of that meeting would be a practical point. Though I'd be happy to keep Heather in the loop, so to speak.
This is a different and unrelated issue.
It is. I put the two together, only because I was replying to a message from Greg which also discussed both.
I don’t know enough about the discussions that take place among the council leadership team to prepare for meetings to have an informed opinion on the practicality of changing the VC one week before the council meeting. It is my belief, however, that it would be best to confirm the new VC’s appointment sooner rather than later. We’re already behind the traditional schedule. If Heather and David can work to make this happen, that’d be great. If not, then keeping Heather “in the loop” is certainly necessary regardless of when she will be taking over.
In any case, I do not believe a formal election with ballots is necessary.
Perhaps just a vote of all councillors. David
All, Also speaking in my personal capacity, I have some sympathy for David's point: choosing procedures on the basis of comfort at the specific situation is a bit bad form. On the other hand, changing procedures in the middle of the process they're about is also somewhat risky, even if in this specific case it obviously would not affect the outcome apart from a small delay. In general, lacking formal rules my instinct would be to follow tradition, precedent. I'm new enough here that I don't know if such votes have been arranged before or otherwise how vice chairs of NCHP have been selected. Perhaps some of the more experienced among us could shed light on the past here? If there have never been NCPH-wide votes before (and there're no written procedures for such), having one now would establish a new precedent. I won't judge if that would be a good or a bad one, but we should keep that in mind if we decide to do it. On the other hand if such votes have always been done in the past, the same applies in reverse. If it's been done occasionally this and occasionally that way... oh well. Perhaps look at which has been more common? In any case, in the long run it would be good to agree on the procedure in advance rather than at the very moment of the election. But I'm not a lawyer and I've never been a councilor myself, so I may be completely lost here and if so, won't mind being shown the light. :-) -- Tapani Tarvainen On Nov 12 14:23, David Cake (dave@difference.com.au) wrote:
On 12 Nov 2015, at 11:25 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote:
Hi,
These are my personal views on this, and I stand to be corrected by others:
On Nov 9, 2015, at 10:09 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
Hi David,
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Amr's email from Nov 06 indicated the NCSG's agreement to Heather's selection as VC from the NCPH - at least I did understand so. So I'm a little confused why a formal election should now take place. There is no need for the CSG to do so, I'm sure.
Please shed some light on the process.
Yes, the NCSG Policy Committee consisting of its 6 elected councillors and appointed members from each of the two NCSG constituencies has reached consensus on Heather’s selection as the NCPH's Vice Chair to the Council.
Which, as you know, does not bind any of the NCSG councillors (unless it chooses to do so, which we haven’t), and given the confusion on the issue.
In the absence of any requirement in the ICANN bylaws/GNSO Operating Procedures to hold formal elections or votes for a VC, this process should be sufficient and consistent with the PC’s role in the NCSG charter.
I would say that in the absence of any by law requirements, the NCPH is effectively a group of councillors (including one that is not part of either SG), in which the SGs have no formal role (though, of course, a huge informal role). My attitude is that, in the absence of any bylaws, we should go with the minimal formal procedure that definitely achieves the objective, rather than make up a procedure based on what we all happen to be comfortable with at the time. Because such ad hoc procedures, if the NCPH fails to settle on a procedure as we have for several years, will become confusing precedent. Lets simply make it formally clear.
On Nov 9, 2015, at 8:21 PM, David Cake <dave@DIFFERENCE.COM.AU> wrote:
Personally, speaking as a councillor, I'd like there to be at least some, however abbreviated, formal election for vice-chair. Ncsg councillors aren't bound, and I wouldn't want to presume how all will vote based on discussion.
As above, I personally do not believe an election is necessary. The views of the (majority of) NCSG councillors were expressed during the NCSG Policy Committee. Enough support has been expressed for Heather’s candidacy as VC to achieve the PC’s required consensus level for an NCSG position.
I believe the PC (and indeed, the SG) has no formal role in the selection of a councillor, in the absence of any rules at all.
All I’m asking for is perhaps a vote of the NCPH councillors, in the absence of any other formal procedure. I expect that that vote will be unanimous, or at the least an overwhelming majority. It need not take more than, say, 48 hours at the outside.
Speaking as acting co-chair etc, planning for the next meeting is already fairly advanced, and while I appreciate Greg's understanding of how busy IGF can be, I'm sure I can keep up with planning. I'd think having the changeover at the conclusion of that meeting would be a practical point. Though I'd be happy to keep Heather in the loop, so to speak.
This is a different and unrelated issue.
It is. I put the two together, only because I was replying to a message from Greg which also discussed both.
I don’t know enough about the discussions that take place among the council leadership team to prepare for meetings to have an informed opinion on the practicality of changing the VC one week before the council meeting. It is my belief, however, that it would be best to confirm the new VC’s appointment sooner rather than later. We’re already behind the traditional schedule. If Heather and David can work to make this happen, that’d be great. If not, then keeping Heather “in the loop” is certainly necessary regardless of when she will be taking over.
In any case, I do not believe a formal election with ballots is necessary.
Perhaps just a vote of all councillors.
David
_______________________________________________ Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
Tapani, David and all, I can't remember that in the past the NCPH councillors took a vote on the VC election. It used to be every time a lengthy debate with low degree of satisfaction to all. We should definitely improve and try to find a better solution - for the next times. This should also include the NCA allocated to our house. I also understand David's point with regards to the independent voting of the NCSG council members. My suggestion here is that you do an internal voting and communicate the result to this list. Johan Helsingius - our NCA - could also be asked for his vote. In the end the 6 CSG votes in favor of Heather could be added. I'd appreciate if this could be arranged until the council meeting on 19 Nov that Heather formally can take position at the end of this meeting. Thanks and best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 7:30 PM To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection _______________________________________________ Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
Not all of our colleagues may be aware that Wolf-Ulrich is a former vice chair from our House, so based on his experience I hope you will give his suggestion serious consideration. From the viewpoint of the CSG Executive Committee, we would prefer that there not be an election for Vice Chair. If the non-commercial side can agree to this, great. If you can’t, please let us know before the Council meeting – preferably no later than Tuesday. Thanks! Steve Metalitz, for CSG Executive Committee From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 3:42 PM To: Tapani Tarvainen; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection Tapani, David and all, I can't remember that in the past the NCPH councillors took a vote on the VC election. It used to be every time a lengthy debate with low degree of satisfaction to all. We should definitely improve and try to find a better solution - for the next times. This should also include the NCA allocated to our house. I also understand David's point with regards to the independent voting of the NCSG council members. My suggestion here is that you do an internal voting and communicate the result to this list. Johan Helsingius - our NCA - could also be asked for his vote. In the end the 6 CSG votes in favor of Heather could be added. I'd appreciate if this could be arranged until the council meeting on 19 Nov that Heather formally can take position at the end of this meeting. Thanks and best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 7:30 PM To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] URGENT re GNSO Council Chair Elections/Vice Chair Selection _______________________________________________ Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership> _______________________________________________ Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership>
Dear all, After discussion with NCSG policy committee and Helsingius, our conclusion is that (1) one major problem with the SG-based election is indeed the exclusion of the NCA, and that (2) we want to come up with a better and well-documented procedure in the future, but (3) due to time constraints we'll now agree to Wolf-Ulrich's suggestion and ask for Helsingius' position in addition to NCSG's councillors. I will proceed accordingly and report back here after hearing from councillors' positions. Thank you, -- Tapani Tarvainen
Following up on this, we didn't hold a formal vote but I called for councillors' views by email and in our recent call. All of NCSG's councillors as well as Helsingius have now expressed their opinion and there are exactly zero opposing Heather's election as the Vice Chair. So we have a consensus. :-) -- Tapani Tarvainen On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 07:43:47AM -0300, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
Dear all,
After discussion with NCSG policy committee and Helsingius, our conclusion is that
(1) one major problem with the SG-based election is indeed the exclusion of the NCA, and that
(2) we want to come up with a better and well-documented procedure in the future, but
(3) due to time constraints we'll now agree to Wolf-Ulrich's suggestion and ask for Helsingius' position in addition to NCSG's councillors.
I will proceed accordingly and report back here after hearing from councillors' positions.
Thank you,
-- Tapani Tarvainen
Thanks for wrapping this up so promptly, Tapani. So are we now in a position to write jointly to Glen to inform her that Heather is the new vice chair? Steve Metalitz, for CSG Executive Committee From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 2:17 PM To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] [PC-NCSG] VC election Following up on this, we didn't hold a formal vote but I called for councillors' views by email and in our recent call. All of NCSG's councillors as well as Helsingius have now expressed their opinion and there are exactly zero opposing Heather's election as the Vice Chair. So we have a consensus. :-) -- Tapani Tarvainen On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 07:43:47AM -0300, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info<mailto:ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info>) wrote:
Dear all,
After discussion with NCSG policy committee and Helsingius, our conclusion is that
(1) one major problem with the SG-based election is indeed the exclusion of the NCA, and that
(2) we want to come up with a better and well-documented procedure in the future, but
(3) due to time constraints we'll now agree to Wolf-Ulrich's suggestion and ask for Helsingius' position in addition to NCSG's councillors.
I will proceed accordingly and report back here after hearing from councillors' positions.
Thank you,
-- Tapani Tarvainen
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership>
Yes - or to be precise, Heather will become new vice chair at the same time as James becomes new chair, at the end of the council meeting. Tapani On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 07:19:48PM +0000, Metalitz, Steven (met@msk.com) wrote:
Thanks for wrapping this up so promptly, Tapani. So are we now in a position to write jointly to Glen to inform her that Heather is the new vice chair?
Steve Metalitz, for CSG Executive Committee
From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 2:17 PM To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] [PC-NCSG] VC election
Following up on this, we didn't hold a formal vote but I called for councillors' views by email and in our recent call. All of NCSG's councillors as well as Helsingius have now expressed their opinion and there are exactly zero opposing Heather's election as the Vice Chair.
So we have a consensus. :-)
-- Tapani Tarvainen
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 07:43:47AM -0300, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info<mailto:ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info>) wrote:
Dear all,
After discussion with NCSG policy committee and Helsingius, our conclusion is that
(1) one major problem with the SG-based election is indeed the exclusion of the NCA, and that
(2) we want to come up with a better and well-documented procedure in the future, but
(3) due to time constraints we'll now agree to Wolf-Ulrich's suggestion and ask for Helsingius' position in addition to NCSG's councillors.
I will proceed accordingly and report back here after hearing from councillors' positions.
Thank you,
-- Tapani Tarvainen
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership>
Dear Tapani, Thank you very much indeed to you and your colleagues. I will do my best to serve the NCPH. Best wishes, Heather ________________________________________ From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org <gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 9:05 To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] [PC-NCSG] VC election Yes - or to be precise, Heather will become new vice chair at the same time as James becomes new chair, at the end of the council meeting. Tapani On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 07:19:48PM +0000, Metalitz, Steven (met@msk.com) wrote:
Thanks for wrapping this up so promptly, Tapani. So are we now in a position to write jointly to Glen to inform her that Heather is the new vice chair?
Steve Metalitz, for CSG Executive Committee
From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 2:17 PM To: gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] [PC-NCSG] VC election
Following up on this, we didn't hold a formal vote but I called for councillors' views by email and in our recent call. All of NCSG's councillors as well as Helsingius have now expressed their opinion and there are exactly zero opposing Heather's election as the Vice Chair.
So we have a consensus. :-)
-- Tapani Tarvainen
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 07:43:47AM -0300, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info<mailto:ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info>) wrote:
Dear all,
After discussion with NCSG policy committee and Helsingius, our conclusion is that
(1) one major problem with the SG-based election is indeed the exclusion of the NCA, and that
(2) we want to come up with a better and well-documented procedure in the future, but
(3) due to time constraints we'll now agree to Wolf-Ulrich's suggestion and ask for Helsingius' position in addition to NCSG's councillors.
I will proceed accordingly and report back here after hearing from councillors' positions.
Thank you,
-- Tapani Tarvainen
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership<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
participants (8)
-
Amr Elsadr -
Carlos Raul Gutierrez -
David Cake -
Greg Shatan -
Heather Forrest -
Metalitz, Steven -
Tapani Tarvainen -
WUKnoben