Begin forwarded message: > From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[log in to unmask]> > Date: October 1, 2009 1:26:07 PM GMT+02:00 > To: "'At-Large Worldwide'" <[log in to unmask]> > Cc: 'Marco Lorenzoni' <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Fwd: Board appointments to fill 3 non- > commercial seats on the new Council > Reply-To: At-Large Worldwide <[log in to unmask]> > > Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > >> >> I am not absolutely sure, but I'm reasonably confident the >> best person to send comments to is Marco Lorenzoni - >> Marco.Lorenzoni[at]icann.org. >> He's Director for Organisational Reviews. > > > I copy Marco in this message, but I think that the questions asked are > really for the Chair of the SIC to answer. > I am sure that we are going to have a very interesting debate in > Seoul about > this, but I can anticipate a few comments. > > First of all, the interaction with the community. > The process that the Board has chosen is modeled on the NomCom, > although > simplified. This means that the first step has been a call for > candidature, > issued, if I remember correctly (staff might correct me and/or give > exact > references), in the beginning of August, with deadline the end of > August. > Public discussion of the candidatures was explicitely excluded, in > the same > way as you do not have public discussion of the candidatures > presented to > the NomCom. > It is extremely unfortunate that most of ALAC has not paid attention > to the > call, that I am sure was posted. Some parts of ALAC were well aware (I > remember having had a discussion on the EURALO list, for instance), > and I > was assuming that all of ALAC was. The reason why I state that it > was an > unfortunate fact, is that we have received only 14 candidatures. I > believe > that at one point in time staff will publish the summary, including > percentages by geographic region and gender. > > Second question, how the selection was done. > The whole purpose of the exercise was to appoint people who were > part of the > non-commercial community that was not sufficiently represented. That > included, but was not limited to, geographic regions not represented > by the > other NCSG councillors, constituencies to be formed, gender equality. > For geographic regions, we noted that the current NCUC councillors > are Bill > Drake (NA, although with EU domicile), Mary Wong (AP, although with NA > domicile) and Carlos Souza (LAC). The obvious absence was Africa. We > considered, therefore, to have an African appointed as a priority. > For constituencies, we noted thyat the a Consumer Constituency had a > petition under approval process, that the technical research and > academia > has a theoretical representation (one representative appointed > yearly to the > NomCom) but no practical presence in the GNSO, that philantropic > institutions have a growing importance, that non-commercial > registrants are > also not represented. But here comes the problem. With the narrow > set of > candidates it has been all but easy to cover these needs. > > Third question, about the individuals chosen. > I have to admit that I do not like to make public statements about the > quality of the candidates when I am part of the panel who makes the > decision, and even less I would like to get into discussions on > possible > alternatives and why the SIC has ended up in not considering them. > However, there are a couple of things I can say. > About Rosemary Sinclair, she is the president of the INTUG, which is > an > international umbrella organization who has several national consumer > organizations as members. The fact that ATUG, her employer, is a > consumer > organization mainly oriented to business users has been considered, > but on > the other hand it has also been considered that the organizations in > INTUG > are covering a wide spectrum, geographically and in terms of interest > groups. There are two points to be taken into account: the first is > that if > the objective is ultimately to build a consumer constituency, the > president > of the largest consumer organization worldwide could be a good > starting > point, and the second is the commitment Rosemary has made to work in > the > interest of the non-commercial users worldwide during her tenure at > the Name > Council. Noting also that we have checked the references, I have > personally > no doubt that she will be very useful for the non-commercial user > community > and instrumental in outreaching to different consumer organizations > that are > now not involved in ICANN. > About Debra Hughes, I confess that I am extremely surprised by the > reaction. > The International Red Cross has been one of the most frequently quoted > examples of the type of organization that we hoped to get involved > in the > NonCommercial User community. Just few weeks ago in a letter to some > Board > members Robin Gross pointed out the fact that now the Red Cross has > joined > the NCUC. I find most surprisingly to have objections about having a > representative of this reputable international organization, twice > Nobel > laureate, integrate the Name Council. While I do agree that she has > an IP > lawyer backgroung, I would like to stress that she is not in the > Council as > an individual, but as a representative of her organization. I wonder > how > many Registries and Registrars are represented in their > constituencies or > stakeholder groups by lawyers. And even ALAC itself has appointed > years ago > a representative to the NomCom who was working for a Registrar. So > what? > Maybe it would have been less contentious to have somebody with a > different > profile, but I personally feel happy that, given the exceptionally > small > number of applicants, we have found people who are well above the > minimum > requirements for the job. > > I would also like to add a last consideration. > People have different interests, wear different hats, what is > important is > how they engage for accomplishing the mission given to them. There > are a few > tasks for these "special" NCSG Cousellors. One of them is outreach, in > particular in their community. Another one is the ability to work > together > with people who have different views, as this will be the case in the > Council, but even in the House or the Stakeholder Group. Staff has > done the > ground work, and prepared tables; the SIC has discussed for several > days, > online, by phone and in person, and has formulated a recommendation; > the > Board has discussed the recommendation and approved it during a > teleconference. There has been a lot of work put in, in good faith, > by a lot > of people for getting this accomplished on time to have the GNSO > Council > seated in Seoul, which will mark a historic change in the GNSO. > What I will ask now is to give the chosen people, who have little or > no > previous experience of ICANN, the benefit of the doubt, and judge > them by > their actions in few months from now, and not prejudge them based on > line > items on their CVs. The Council has to work together, the NCSG has > to work > together, to start pointing fingers a few hours after the > appointment is not > a good way to start. Watch their actions closely, criticize them > bitterly > (but politely) if they take positions that in your opinion are > against the > non-commercial community, but please wait until they act for passing > judgement. > > Best regards, > Roberto > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > [log in to unmask] > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org *********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland [log in to unmask] www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************