On Jun 17, 2008, at 9:32 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Bret Fausett wrote:
I very much like the fact that one ALAC representative from each region comes from the NomComm,
Please elaborate.
I know that in the year I served on the Nominating Committee, we tried very hard to use the Nominating Committee appointments to supplement the skills of the various groups for which we had responsibility (Board, GNSO, ccNSO, ALAC). We thought about what those groups needed, received input from the groups themselves about what was needed, considered input from the entire community about what was needed, and then found and appointed people to fill what we believed were the most important needs. In my year, this meant bringing some new faces to the ICANN Board. We especially looked for people with financial backgrounds, for the Board finance and audit committees. We wanted someone from China on the Board. It also meant appointing an older, more experienced face to the GNSO, which was having difficulties at the time, and which we thought could benefit from the experience of a former Board member. It meant bringing people with past experience in organization building and recruiting to the new and developing ALAC. Nominating Committees vary from year to year, but observation of recent results tells me it still works much this way. The Nominating Committee is uniquely positioned to fill in gaps in what the other processes don't produce.* I think it's the part of ICANN that has worked best over the last few years. Bret * The fact that NomComms pick skill sets as much as they pick people means that if you've applied in the past and not been selected, it's probably because you didn't have the skill set that was needed at that particular time. I know for a fact that people who have been passed in some years have been selected in succeeding years, including for Board seats, so if you're interested, keep your name in consideration by reapplying.