Hi

On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:07 AM, David Cake wrote:

> At 7:48 AM +0100 6/8/09, Rebecca MacKinnon wrote:
>> It's highly unfortunate and disappointing.
>>
>> Nonetheless, should we encourage NCUC community members to step up  
>> for
>> this, particularly members who come from countries in the developing
>> world and/or from countries which do not have free and fair  
>> elections,
>> and thus whose governments (and by extension GAC representatives)
>> arguably do not represent citizens' interests?
>>
>> The alternative it seems is that it would be filled with people
>> currently unknown to the NCUC community.
>>
>> They want diversity, we show them we have it?
>
> 	In my opinion, we should nominate as many people as we can, from as  
> many different groups as we can (certainly including, but not  
> limited to, members from the developing world, and from countries  
> whose GAC representatives may not represent them well).
> 	We have basically no idea what criteria the SIC will be using to  
> select candidates,

I think we do: persons not currently affiliated with NCUC.  We already  
suggested three credible names that were "diverse and robust,"  and  
because we did it (rather than having them injected sotto voce)  
apparently they're non-starters with the CSG => staff => SIC.

> and it is in our interest to nominate people that cover as many  
> bases as possible. We should be putting up people from a range of  
> backgrounds, from a range of countries, to maximise our chances that  
> these seats will go to someone sympathetic to NCUC.

I agree.  I don't expect success, but think we should take every  
opportunity to have our reasonable suggestions rejected so as to  
strengthen our case, internally and externally.

Bill
>