I think a leadership team of 4 is getting out of hand.  This is an important PDP certainly but it unlikely to be as anything like as complex as the Subsequent Procedures one, and even that is currently managing with 3.  I would have said 2 co-chairs is the way to go for this one.  I’m concerned that the bigger the “leadership” group the harder it is for them to find a time that they can actually get together to plan for the calls.  The role of the chair(s) is to be impartial after all so it should not matter where they come from but rather whether they have the requisite skill-set. 

Susan Payne
Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd

E: susan.payne@valideus.com
D: +44 20 7421 8255
T: +44 20 7421 8299
M: +44 7971 661175

From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Frost via gnso-rpm-wg
Sent: 12 April 2016 15:45
To:
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Suggestion for Leadership Team

I tend to agree that there might be balance issues in that  the non-contracted party house would have three representatives and the contracted party house would have none.

I think a viable option would be to  Phil as the Chair, J. Scott and Kathy as Vice Chairs, and a third vice chair from the contracted party house, to balance the equation.

Jonathan

From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan via gnso-rpm-wg
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:38 AM
To: Statton Hammock <statton@rightside.rocks>
Cc: Zahid Jamil-IG via gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Suggestion for Leadership Team

I have some concerns with this configuration in terms of balance (and related concerns about the accuracy of Volker's categorizations, on both the "formal" and de facto levels).  As such I would instead suggest J. Scott and Kathy as co-chairs, with Phil remaining in the role of GNSO Liaison (the primary role to which Phil was already appointed).

Greg Shatan

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Statton Hammock via gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> wrote:

Also agree with Volker's suggestion. 

Statton 

Statton Hammock

Vice-President, Business & Legal Affairs

Office   | 425-298-2367

Mobile | 425-891-9297

statton@rightside.rocks

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Gabriela Szlak via gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> wrote:

+ 1 to Volker.

Gabriela Szlak 

Skype: gabrielaszlak

Twitter: @GabiSzlak

La información contenida en este e-mail es confidencial. 

The information in this e-mail is confidential.

2016-04-12 10:24 GMT-03:00 Volker Greimann via gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>:

Hi all,

with the list of nominations and seconds that we have right now (and provided we will not get any last minute nominations), it looks like Phil, Scott and Kathy have the most support. While none of these candidates represent contracted parties, I do not see this as a problem, as I have great faith in the neutrality of all candidates.

With Phil formally representing business interests, Scott the IP concerns and Kathy the non commercial users, I propose we consider a triumvirate, maybe with one chair and two co/vice-chairs, with Phil as chair and Scott and Kathy as co-chairs.

Best regards,

Volker
_______________________________________________
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

_______________________________________________
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

_______________________________________________
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg