Hi Amr,

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 09:18:10PM +0000, Amr Elsadr ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

> What I was thinking was that [Rafik] may continue between now, and
> when a new NCSG EC and Councilors are in place following the AGM in
> October. Once that is done, he could resign, and allow the new NCSG
> EC to fill his seat as per the NCSG Charter.

Ah, that's a creative idea!

> I am also in favor of using clear and unambiguous procedures that
> are already in place, particularly if their use is somewhat of a
> novel(ish) precedent.

Right. So not technically bending the rules, not even quite looking
for loopholes but still using the rules in a new, creative way.

I guess that's appropriate for "Special circumstances." :-)

But appointing someone to the council with the explicit intent of
having them resign immediate after their term begins is not exactly
elegant, IMHO.

And it would still be the EC appointing the councillor, or actually
doing it twice, the first time just with the extra step of getting a
special permission from the council. But while the second of those
would be business as usual, the first would be new also for NCSG and
how to decide that according to NCSG Charter is not entirely obvious -
it'd be creating new procedure just as doing a temporary appointment
in this situation would be.

While the GNSO procedures are clear and unambiguous on this,
NCSG Charter isn't.

> If you ask me for my personal insight, I believe it is unlikely that
> the Council would reject this course of action.

Yes, I expect they'd eventually approve it with an understanding smirk.

> This would be an interesting exercise

It would certainly have serious #popcorn value.

> [it] should be a satisfactory outcome to all parties involved.

Given NCSG history I seriously doubt that any outcome whatsoever
could be satisfactory to all.

> It delays nothing, and creates no serious negative
> consequences that I can think of.

Somehow I don't think it'd improve NCSG's reputation and
credibility... but perhaps there's nothing left of those to lose.

It'd also mean that the new councillor would not be able to
participate in the AGM. I'd call that a negative consequence,
seriousness open to debate.

But on the positive side, it would provide entertainment to the
entire Council. :-)

> Thanks for entertaining me on this. :-)

Likewise!

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen