The NomCom2 Review produced 27 recommendations. Unfortunately the bylaws
amendments made no change to the number and nature of delegates from the
GNSO (i.e., 1 each from the RySG, RrSG, ISPCP,  IPC, NCSG/NCUC, and 2
from the BC), so we will still be severely under-represented in the
NomCom. The length of terms were extended to two years for all groups
(some had 1-year terms previously), and there is a limit of at most
two consecutive terms.

Strangely the recommendations contain a major inconsistency in, on
one hand, wanting to avoid an "all newbies" situation and thus
insisting on staggered terms (so only half of nomcom would be replaced
every year) but then stating that in introducing the new terms,
all reps have to be newly appointed, starting their term at the
2024 AGM (and existing reps can't be reappointed). To deal with
the dilemma, GNSO is asked to decide (by toss of coin) which
reps get a special 1-year term instead of the normal 2-year one.

I would love to hear from our reps on the team what the rationale
for this is, and that is why I am copying our representatives
on the NomCom Review Implementation Working Group, Ines Hfaiedh,
Raoul Plommer and Remmy Nweke as well as our current NomCom
representative Pascal Bekono, hoping they can shed some light
on the recommendation, as well as help explain why the representation
issue wasn't addressed.

	Julf