Hi, Was was told that Adam''s email had not made it to the list. So my responding to just a little piece of it did not really work to show the full extent of his massacre of my email I tend to be minimalist about what I include in my replies so I will have a lower word count on any Narten monitored lists - don't remember if this is such a list. This is the entire message I responded to; Begin forwarded message:

From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> Date: 4 March 2011 06:00:06 EST To: Avri Doria <avri@ella.com> Cc: <ocl@gih.com>, <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: ICANN is looking for qualified qualified people to, fill leadership positions within its organization - Deadline is April, 2, 2011.

Avri, hi.

...

Hi Olivier,

Since you ask:

1 I want ICANN to be uninvolved - from day one until the end of the vetting process. I do not trust them to not trip up people they consider unacceptable or somehow outliers. And from the private mail I am getting, I am assuming I am not the only one who is concerned about this. I just tend to be more outspoken than most and am ready to stand up about the little revenges that ICANN doles out to those who go against the corporate will.

2. I want the process used to be fully documented, and the tracking through the process public. So for example if some applicant misses a stage in the process for some undefined reason, they can see on a public chart that they were supposed to have sent in a specific form and the staff has reported them as having refused to send in the form and perhaps even have to time to remedy a situation.

I believe the only point in the process where information submitted by a candidate might slip through the cracks is when they submit their SOI. At all other times there are multiple checks/layers involved in receiving information.

The SOI is received by one person, a member of staff. It is possible they could miss that information coming in. As NomCom Chair I will check with ICANN tech department that nothing has been missed in the SOI application stage (I think I mentioned to you before that I would do this). I cannot speak for how chairs of previous NomComs have checked information coming into the committee, but I remember conducting checks while associate chair a few years ago.

Anyone submitting an SOI is told to expect an acknowledgement and that their references will be contacted. Hopefully they would notice their SOI had not been acknowledged and inform the NomCom. I do not believe there is another point in the process when any single person could inadvertently or deliberately cause any incoming information to be missed.

I think I mentioned all this to you some months ago. We've long known email is not 100% reliable and have processes in place to try and catch any problems with information flowing to the NomCom.

I think you may be confusing the At Large process used to select a Director last year and ICANN NomCom.

...

3. I want the names of candidates published.

My understanding is the NomCom review recommended the opposite. Reviewers Recommendation 14. Maintain core confidentiality of candidates' data (etc.)

...

I understand the cross-cultural pressures.

NomCom has an obligation under the bylaws to ensure diversity. We try to respect cultural norms as best we understand them, I consider publishing names of candidates would be a problem for people from many regions.

...

But ICANN is a cross-cultural pressure cooker, and if you can stand the heat of losing an appointment, you don't belong in a role governing it.

Thank you for you opinion.

...

I know people will say we won't get candidates, but getting candidates now, when it is in secret, is like pulling teeth, I doubt it would get worse.

Some years ago a NomCom chair conducted an informal poll of all people who had at the time been appointed by the NomCom and asked if they would have applied had the process required that their name was published. My recollection is 30% said they would not. 30% of successful candidates would have been lost to ICANN, I think that is unacceptable.

However, opinions change, I will conduct a similar survey and publish the results.

...

4. I am fully fine with the personal details discussed as well as any information gained in the vetting remaining private - this is private information. This is the only part that should be confidential. The SOI's, with the exception of personal data should be available for all to read and all to comment on.

Thank you for your opinion. I think the community and NomCom review disagreed.

...

As for the process being one of the most independent. From the vantage point of the volunteers, I am sure that this is the case. But since everything is done in the dark, one never knows what machinations might have been going on behind the scenes that maybe even the members and the chairs did not know about.

And I too think the choices made last year were for the most part great. Some, and I not just speaking of the board, have yet to prove themselves. But this is not my point and I have every faith that they will all be stars.

I know that it is a lot of things I want to see changed. But the most important, and the one I was addressing in my note is that I want ICANN staff excluded from the process as soon as possible. As long as the staff is responsible for the behind the scenes services, they can affect the process - and there is not way to prevent it. And since the roles of those picked by the Nomcom have an affect on ICANN's operations this risk of interference is intolerable in an open and accountable process.

I think you concerns are unfounded, but I will ask the NomCom to consider. We'll make improvements as required and keep the community informed.

Best,

Adam

Adam Peake Chair, 2011 ICANN Nominating Committee

...

a.

On 3 Mar 2011, at 13:07, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:

...

On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 19:48:37 +0100, Avri Doria wrote:

...

This is the message I send whenever I see a solicitation for Nomcom.

I think that Nomcom is currently flawed in that it is managed/coordinated by staff as opposed to being a totally separate function as I believe it is defined to be.

This combined by the utter secrecy and non transparency of the process allows for a situation where ICANN officers can, should they be wish, affect the outcome. The process is especially vulnerable to influence by acts of omission and to other difficult to discover acts.

I am not making an accusation against any of the staff that serve to support the Nomcom itself, they are nice hard working people who are loyal ICANN employees who do what they are instructed to do. It is the possibility of misdeed by those more senior that concerns me.

I advise everyone I know to avoid ICANN Nomcom, and will continue to do so until such time as it has a completely separate staffing. I also avoid it myself, but that is as much because I do not believe that insiders, which I am defining as people who have already been active in ICANN for 4 years or more in recent years, as for reasons of mistrust and for the personal reason of having been burned without real redress in a nomcom like process in the recent past.

...and Avri, I beg to differ.

I served on the NomCom last year and in my view, it is one of the most independent processes in ICANN that I ever took part in. It is shrouded with "confidentiality", often confused as "secrecy" in order to protect the candidates themselves because unfortunately we live in a world where people who do not get selected are sometimes pointed out as "losers" and shamed. How do you wish to be transparent in a discussion where you discuss a candidate's most private details, their career, their track record? Their perceived potential? How do you wish the discussions in NomCom to be frank and open within the group, if NomCom members were not bound by confidentiality?

I have found serving on NomCom for a year, to be a very refreshing experience, and I am so pleased to see the candidates we chose last year, spread their wings and serve ICANN successfully this year. I encourage everyone to apply for leadership position through NomCom, not only for Board positions, but also for GNSO, ccNSO and ALAC positions. At first glance, these might appear "less glamorous" than a Board position on a CV but ICANN isn't about glamour, it's about making the bottom-up decision process work, and NomCom members will quickly see through an application that's filed to make a CV look good.

Warmest regards,

Olivier (wearing an individual hat)

-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html