Replacement and Removal of Members
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT. Alan ======= If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement. If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
Thank you Alan! Two recommendations (see in yellow below) , but I'm supporting the current text as well if most members are okay with your text. Kind regards, Erika If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a new (delete = replacement) member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement. If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause (delete = at leas) (50%) 70% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted. On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:51 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members
I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT.
Alan
=======
If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement.
If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
Dear Alan, Thanks for sharing the proposed text. I'm fine with the first paragraph. For the second paragraph, I believe the disputing part will be how to define "disruptive", a 50% team member's request for removal will be persuasive. I was just wondering the meaning that "the member fails to resign", would it be better to change it to "the member refuses to resign"? For your and other team member's consideration. Thanks and regards, Lili -----Original Message----- From: rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Sunday, 27 August, 2017 10:52 AM To: RDS-WHOIS2-RT <rds-whois2-rt@icann.org> Subject: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Replacement and Removal of Members I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT. Alan ======= If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement. If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted. _______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt *************************************************************************************************** This message, and any attachment contained, are confidential and subject of legal privilege. It may be used solely for the designated police/justice purpose and by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The information is not to be disseminated to another agency or third party without the author’s consent, and must not be retained longer than is necessary for the fulfilment of the purpose for which the information is to be used. All practicable steps shall be taken by the recipients to ensure that information is protected against unauthorised access or processing. INTERPOL reserves the right to enquire about the use of the information provided. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error. In such a case, you should not print it, copy it, make any use of it or disclose it, but please notify us immediately and delete the message from any computer. *************************************************************************************************
Hello Alan, I am a bit worried by this as the powers to remove a member are quite broad while the reasons for removal are quite vague. What would for example constitute disruptive behavior. Would refusing consensus or opposing a majority view count? It seems to be a potential way to remove dissent from the group and I am not sure that we would be the better for it. I have no issue with having the ability to remove a member that misses the majority of meetings without apology (as opposed to being a victim of bad scheduling) or that misbehaves to a point to make the work itself impossible (as opposed to mere opposition), although from the setup of the group I doubt we will have that latter issue. As for witdrawal of endorsement, I would assume this would have to be an active act of that SO/AC, not the failure to renew an existing endorsement. I would propose that any withdrawal of endorsement must be coupled with the appointment of a new member, e.g. if no new member is suggested by the AC/SO the current member would not be removed (constructive vote of no confidence). As for Erikas comment, I would propose that the voting thresholds be aligned at 70% for both votes, otherwise we would have a lower threshold for the actual removal vote than for the vote to request removal. Best regards, Volker Am 28.08.2017 um 01:43 schrieb SUN Lili:
Dear Alan, Thanks for sharing the proposed text. I'm fine with the first paragraph. For the second paragraph, I believe the disputing part will be how to define "disruptive", a 50% team member's request for removal will be persuasive. I was just wondering the meaning that "the member fails to resign", would it be better to change it to "the member refuses to resign"? For your and other team member's consideration. Thanks and regards, Lili
-----Original Message----- From: rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Sunday, 27 August, 2017 10:52 AM To: RDS-WHOIS2-RT <rds-whois2-rt@icann.org> Subject: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Replacement and Removal of Members
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members
I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT.
Alan
=======
If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement.
If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
*************************************************************************************************** This message, and any attachment contained, are confidential and subject of legal privilege. It may be used solely for the designated police/justice purpose and by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The information is not to be disseminated to another agency or third party without the author’s consent, and must not be retained longer than is necessary for the fulfilment of the purpose for which the information is to be used. All practicable steps shall be taken by the recipients to ensure that information is protected against unauthorised access or processing. INTERPOL reserves the right to enquire about the use of the information provided. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error. In such a case, you should not print it, copy it, make any use of it or disclose it, but please notify us immediately and delete the message from any computer. ************************************************************************************************* _______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
I do think that we should define "disruptive". I have been a minority viewpoint on many committees here now, largely because I remind people of how data protection law is drafted, implemented and further defined in policy. Given the contentious nature of the WHOIS debates, that has been a very lonely position, but since I appear to have been the only person with any actual experience in these matters on several of those committees, I am quite unrepentant. ICANN has a long history of ignoring the privacy perspective. It would not be hard to find 50% of people who would like to get rid of me, just to speed things up and not be bothered with the facts/alternate view. I think if we don't define "disruptive", we at least need to make it a larger majority of members, so I support Erika's suggestion of 70%. Stephanie Perrin On 2017-08-27 19:43, SUN Lili wrote:
Dear Alan, Thanks for sharing the proposed text. I'm fine with the first paragraph. For the second paragraph, I believe the disputing part will be how to define "disruptive", a 50% team member's request for removal will be persuasive. I was just wondering the meaning that "the member fails to resign", would it be better to change it to "the member refuses to resign"? For your and other team member's consideration. Thanks and regards, Lili
-----Original Message----- From: rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Sunday, 27 August, 2017 10:52 AM To: RDS-WHOIS2-RT <rds-whois2-rt@icann.org> Subject: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Replacement and Removal of Members
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members
I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT.
Alan
=======
If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement.
If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
*************************************************************************************************** This message, and any attachment contained, are confidential and subject of legal privilege. It may be used solely for the designated police/justice purpose and by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The information is not to be disseminated to another agency or third party without the author’s consent, and must not be retained longer than is necessary for the fulfilment of the purpose for which the information is to be used. All practicable steps shall be taken by the recipients to ensure that information is protected against unauthorised access or processing. INTERPOL reserves the right to enquire about the use of the information provided. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error. In such a case, you should not print it, copy it, make any use of it or disclose it, but please notify us immediately and delete the message from any computer. ************************************************************************************************* _______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
Stephanie, Volker, Lili and all, I patterned this after rules I have seen elsewhere. I don't think it is possible to definitively define "disruptive", but presume if it was agreed to by a large majority in any specific case, that was sufficient. I cannot really imagine that we would ever exercise such a clause, and am happy to remove it completely. In a simpler time when we were less focused on process, we would not even have written such a rule and just dealt with replacing (or removing!) someone as the situation arose. Alan At 28/08/2017 11:00 AM, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
I do think that we should define "disruptive". I have been a minority viewpoint on many committees here now, largely because I remind people of how data protection law is drafted, implemented and further defined in policy. Given the contentious nature of the WHOIS debates, that has been a very lonely position, but since I appear to have been the only person with any actual experience in these matters on several of those committees, I am quite unrepentant. ICANN has a long history of ignoring the privacy perspective. It would not be hard to find 50% of people who would like to get rid of me, just to speed things up and not be bothered with the facts/alternate view. I think if we don't define "disruptive", we at least need to make it a larger majority of members, so I support Erika's suggestion of 70%.
Stephanie Perrin
On 2017-08-27 19:43, SUN Lili wrote:
Dear Alan, Thanks for sharing the proposed text. I'm fine with the first paragraph. For the second paragraph, I believe the disputing part will be how to define "disruptive", a 50% team member's request for removal will be persuasive. I was just wondering the meaning that "the member fails to resign", would it be better to change it to "the member refuses to resign"? For your and other team member's consideration. Thanks and regards, Lili
-----Original Message----- From: <mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org>rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Sunday, 27 August, 2017 10:52 AM To: RDS-WHOIS2-RT <mailto:rds-whois2-rt@icann.org><rds-whois2-rt@icann.org> Subject: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Replacement and Removal of Members
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members
I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT.
Alan
=======
If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement.
If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list <mailto:RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org>RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
*************************************************************************************************** This message, and any attachment contained, are confidential and subject of legal privilege. It may be used solely for the designated police/justice purpose and by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The information is not to be disseminated to another agency or third party without the authorâs consent, and must not be retained longer than is necessary for the fulfilment of the purpose for which the information is to be used. All practicable steps shall be taken by the recipients to ensure that information is protected against unauthorised access or processing. INTERPOL reserves the right to enquire about the use of the information provided. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error. In such a case, you should not print it, copy it, make any use of it or disclose it, but please notify us immediately and delete the message from any computer. ************************************************************************************************* _______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list <mailto:RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org>RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:Ttcvlt6OhgspplyWCJnDw5kVt6JuRql5pHW/wKKUAjfa7+7PNyqISww30ehOMuAo4vtZrK5VNBM6ozb4OD3rAp5g0roDa80tXEgbuSIo9TfoDZ5C/EL2L0GKUPzM3mvN X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160513016)(750103)(520002050)(701014)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095);
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
No problem with the wording change. Alan At 27/08/2017 07:43 PM, SUN Lili wrote:
Dear Alan, Thanks for sharing the proposed text. I'm fine with the first paragraph. For the second paragraph, I believe the disputing part will be how to define "disruptive", a 50% team member's request for removal will be persuasive. I was just wondering the meaning that "the member fails to resign", would it be better to change it to "the member refuses to resign"? For your and other team member's consideration. Thanks and regards, Lili
-----Original Message----- From: rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Sunday, 27 August, 2017 10:52 AM To: RDS-WHOIS2-RT <rds-whois2-rt@icann.org> Subject: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Replacement and Removal of Members
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members
I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT.
Alan
=======
If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to refill the position with a replacement member. The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own processes and will not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied requesting their endorsement.
If a Review Team member is sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 50% of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to resign. If the member fails to resign, the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and replace the member. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be removed by a 2/3 majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
*************************************************************************************************** This message, and any attachment contained, are confidential and subject of legal privilege. It may be used solely for the designated police/justice purpose and by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The information is not to be disseminated to another agency or third party without the authorâs consent, and must not be retained longer than is necessary for the fulfilment of the purpose for which the information is to be used. All practicable steps shall be taken by the recipients to ensure that information is protected against unauthorised access or processing. INTERPOL reserves the right to enquire about the use of the information provided. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error. In such a case, you should not print it, copy it, make any use of it or disclose it, but please notify us immediately and delete the message from any computer. *************************************************************************************************
I made a few emendations. See them inline. One is the matter of appointment, isn't it the Board that appoints the RT member? If my understanding is correct, then some changes I propose shall apply. If not, then strike them. -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799 <(876)%20818-1799>Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I was asked to propose wording for the section of the Terms of Reference on Replacement and Removal of Members
I would like to propose the following wording for the consideration of the RT.
Alan
=======
If a Review Team member is no longer able or willing to serve, or if an SO/AC withdraws its endorsement of the member, the SO/AC making the original endorsement will be requested to make a new endorsement for the position . . The SO/AC will make the selection according to their own rules and processes and shall not be bound to consider only those candidates who originally applied and request ed their endorsement.
If a Review Team member is deemed by the evidence sufficiently inactive or disruptive as to cause at least 2/3rd of Review Team members (excluding the member in question) to request their removal, the member will be asked to withdraw . If the member fails to withdraw , the SO/AC that endorsed the member will be requested to withdraw their endorsement and request the member resign. Should the SO/AC not take action, the member can be excluded from the Review Team by a 2/3 rd majority vote of the remaining Review Team members. In all cases, the balloting will be carried out in such a way as to not reveal how individual members voted.
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...> <#m_3736834205678926124_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
participants (6)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Carlton Samuels -
Erika Mann -
Stephanie Perrin -
SUN Lili -
Volker Greimann