Sorry for not focusing on this earlier (trying to juggle too many balls at the moment). I would add one sentence at the end of the paragraph starting with "The current NomCom includes...": Moreover, the decrease in ALAC NomCom members is predicated by the appointment of one At-Large voting Director, while the gNSO will have an estimated six members (assuming 1 per contracted party SG and 2 per non-contracted party SG) despite it having TWO voting Directors. Alan At 23/11/2009 11:35 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

Hello everyone, It's been a week since Wendy posted her excellent comments on the proposed NomComm changes. I haven't seen any contrary comments so far. I'm quite happy with them comments (that were made subsequent to a conversation in last week's teleconference) and am prepared to change this from a "draft" statement to a full one endorsed by NARALO, to be sent to ALAC for further endorsement at its meeting tomorrow. If there are any disagreements with this process or with Wendy's (now NARALO's) statement, please make them quickly. Thanks so much Wendy! Your comments well reflect the sentiment from the meeting and express the salient points very well. - Evan 2009/11/17 Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com> > At yesterday's meeting, I volunteered to write up NARALO's response to > the NomCom Review Finalization Working Group, > <http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#nomcom-review-2009>, with > particular concern regarding its suggestion to reduce ALAC's > representatives from 5 to 3. Here are my draft comments, for > consideration by NARALO and forwarding, at your choice, to ALAC. > > --Wendy > > **DRAFT COMMENTS** > > The NomCom Review Finalization Working Group has requested comments on > its Recommendation 10, regarding the nominating committee's size and > composition. > <http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#nomcom-review-2009>,

...

< > http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/nomcom/nomcom-review-finalization-wg-draft-r...

...

. > The [North American Regional At-Large Organization / > At-Large Advisory Committee] recommend that the NomCom retain the > current five voting delegates from ALAC. > > The current NomCom includes five members appointed by ALAC, one from > each geographic region, along with 7 from GNSO constituencies, and 5 > from other SOs and technical advisory groups. The WG's strawman > proposal reduces the ALAC representatives to 3, rotating among the > regions (and thus ensuring that two regions are unrepresented through > this means), while preserving nearly all of the other delegations. > > NARALO/ALAC believe that this reduction in ALAC representation is unwise > from the standpoints of geographic diversity, the broad range of ICANN > issues beyond generic names, and representation of the at-large > Internet-using public. > > * ALAC's representatives assure the NomCom a degree of geographic > diversity that no other selection means provides. Outreach to potential > recruits and assessment of regionally relevant qualifications are > important responsibilities of the NomCom. ALAC's five regionally > diverse appointments (Bylaws XI.2.4.e) ensure that the NomCom will have > at least one member from each of ICANN's geographic regions. > > * ALAC's remit is wider than that of the GNSO constituencies, whose > selection forms the largest part of the NomCom. ALAC's delegates to the > NomCom may have expertise or mandates reaching beyond the generic names > into the other areas of ICANN focus (addressing, ccTLDs), and help to > broaden the search and selection to include candidates with expertise in > those areas. > > * The ALAC delegates to the NomCom fulfill part of ICANN's initial > promise to represent the individual Internet user. The NomCom is > currently the most democratic means of selection within ICANN -- anyone > can apply for an appointment through NomCom, and all applicants are > considered by a diverse multistakeholder group. Individual Internet > users, who were initially promised half the voting directors on the > Board, but now have fewer than other SOs and ACs, should be given > substantial voice in this selection channel. Even when ALAC is granted > one voting director, as the Board has agreed in principle, though we > cannot know how long that process will take, that single vote on the > Board does not substitute for NomCom representation. The WG recognizes > that Board members' fiduciary duties to the organization supersede any > membership or allegiance to an originating body. While members of the > NomCom are not free to consult on specific nominees with their selecting > organization, they may be given more guidance. As the voices of > individual Internet users vary, a selection of five helps to bring the > at-large's diversity of viewpoints into the NomCom's selection process. > > We believe that the NomCom's current size is closer to optimal than a > smaller group would be, but if the WG is looking for cuts, it could > eliminate the double representation of the Business Constituency, and > select GNSO representatives from Stakeholder Groups rather than > Constituencies. > > > In response to the WG's specific questions: > > • How do various part of the ICANN community value thee current size of > the NomCom? > > NARALO/ALAC support the current size. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." > > • To what extent does the trust that is placed in the nominating > committee depend on direct representation of stakeholder groups on the > committee? > > Since we cannot see inside much of the process, due to strongly-enforced > confidentiality assertions, we can only judge its inputs and outputs. > Delegating five members from the representative of the at-large Internet > using public gives us trust that the inputs are representative of and > attentive to indivduals' interests and concerns. > > • What mmechanisms might serve to ensure geographic and other diversity > goals (gender, background ...) within the NomCom, given that its > membership is appointed independently by different ICANN entities? > > The current ALAC selection assures geographic diversity of its 5 > delegates. A reduction in number would weaken that contribution toward > diversity. > > • What objectives can be realistically set and what measures adopted for > achieving gender balance in the NomCom and ­ through the NomCom > processes ­ in the Board? > > The NomCom and its agents (search ffirms, staff) should be given a broad > outreach mandate, and required to pull in at least [30] female > candidates (as compared to last year's 15). The current gender > imbalance (only one female voting board member among 15) is a visible > signal that the various outreach and selection processes have failed to > attract sufficiently diverse qualified candidates -- and a strong > indicator that diversity of other less visible characteristics than > gender is likely missing from the pool as well. > > > > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------