All...,

"Oops and Apologies" - I certainly misread the response from Stefania...sorry! (my bad)

I was politely declining in lieu of the more experienced person where it appeared that it was already telegraphed to the Council.

*Please re-accept my application as a volunteer as an alternate on the SCI.

And yes I agree with you Tapani it is indeed better to have "more than less" - the Council will then make an informed decision.

regards

Karel

  

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Karel,

Please reconsider. Note that there are two positions to be
filled in SCI, primary and alternate, and if Stefania moves
from alternate to primary, it still leaves alternate free
for new volunteers such as yourself.

Also, while I indicated I'd be willing to take the alternate
myself, it's not like I need more work, so I'd be only happy
to spread the load and have someone active like you there.
I'll be keeping close contact with our SCI representatives
anyway, I don't need to be there myself.

In general it's also better to have too many volunteers
than too few. I would encourage all who think themselves
able and willing to throw their hat in the ring and give
the Policy Committee the rare luxury of having several
good candidates to choose from.

Tapani

On Nov 02 16:36, Karel Douglas ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

> All ,
>
> In light of Stefania's email where she indicated that she had
> already telegraphed her interest to the Committee , and in the spirit of
> consensus in the community I would respectfully withdraw my "candidacy" as
> a volunteer.
>
> Best regards
>
> Karel DOUGLAS
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:07 PM, James Gannon <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > I think Stefania as a new councillor would get a double dose of value for
> > us in this position.
> >
> > -James
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 02/11/2015, 5:03 p.m., "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of "Kleinwächter,
> > Wolfgang"" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of
> > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > >1+ for Stefania
> > >
> > >wolfgang
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > >Von: NCSG-Discuss im Auftrag von Milan, Stefania
> > >Gesendet: Mo 02.11.2015 13:41
> > >An: [log in to unmask]
> > >Betreff: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Call for volunteers: New SCI representative &
> > alternate
> > >
> > >Dear all
> > >
> > >I have already made my availability known to the NCSG Policy Committee
> > but forgot to do so on this list.
> > >
> > >I believe serving on SCI would be particularly helpful in view of my
> > recent election to the GNSO Council.
> > >
> > >Best, Stefania
> > >
> > >________________________________
> > >Da: NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]> per conto di Karel
> > Douglas <[log in to unmask]>
> > >Inviato: lunedì 2 novembre 2015 13.36
> > >A: [log in to unmask]
> > >Oggetto: Re: Call for volunteers: New SCI representative & alternate
> > >
> > >Dear All,
> > >
> > >I have read up on some of the documents and browsed the SCI site with the
> > current work up for consideration, previous work done in 2014, 2013 , etc
> > and would be happy to volunteer as an alternate.
> > >
> > >I hoping that my legal training and experience in corporate governance
> > would benefit the SCI.
> > >
> > >kind regards
> > >
> > >Karel DOUGLAS
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Karel Douglas <[log in to unmask]
> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> > >WOW...that was fast!  :-)
> > >
> > >Thanks AMR for your very comprehensive and detailed reply. Yes - your
> > answer has helped!
> > >
> > >I will certainly do some reading up on the SCI charter and take a look at
> > the public record of the work done to date by the SCI.
> > >
> > >Many thanks buddy!
> > >
> > >kind regards
> > >
> > >Karel
> > >
> > >On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Amr Elsadr <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
> > [log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> > >Hi Karel,
> > >
> > >> On Oct 30, 2015, at 2:35 PM, Karel Douglas <[log in to unmask]
> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Thanks Avri et al
> > >>
> > >> Avri - blunt and to the point is always appreciated.
> > >>
> > >> As a newbie I have a couple brief questions which are flying around my
> > head :
> > >>
> > >> (1) how often does the SCI meet to discuss changes to the documents?
> > >
> > >Usually once every two weeks for one hour as long as there are ongoing
> > projects the SCI is working on. When there are projects, most of the work
> > (as is the case with all groups) takes place offline and over email. In the
> > past, temporary sub-teams have also been set up to work intensively on
> > something, before review by the full committee.
> > >
> > >> (2) how do suggested amendments / improvements get to the SCI...are
> > improvements generated by regular internal review in the SCI or are
> > suggested changes transmitted by GNSO / NCUC / NPOC to the SCI for review
> > ,report and recommendation?
> > >
> > >The SCI has the discretion to suggest initiation of work on a certain
> > topic, but this needs to be communicated to the GNSO Council. Normally, it
> > is the Council that passes on questions/puzzles to the SCI, and ask the
> > committee to have some fun with it.
> > >
> > >In the recent past, there was an attempt by a GNSO constituency to
> > directly request the SCI to take up a project, but this was deemed as
> > outside the normal process. If (for example) NCUC or NPOC want the SCI to
> > review something, they would need to advise their representatives on the
> > GNSO Council, and ask them to take it up with the full council first.
> > >
> > >> (3) How are suggested changes eventually made? Is it unilaterally or
> > does it come back for approval of the GNSO EC and /or membership.
> > >
> > >The SCI needs to achieve full consensus on any recommended changes it
> > makes to the GNSO operating procedures. Before forwarding its
> > recommendations to the council, a public comment period needs to be held,
> > then finally a motion and a vote on the GNSO council for the GNSO to adopt
> > the recommended changes. If ICANN bylaws need to be amended for any
> > reasons, the ICANN board will need to hold a public comment period of its
> > own, and have its own resolution to adopt changes.
> > >
> > >> Even if I don't put my hat in the ring I would love to hear more about
> > the SCI. I guess there is an SCI operating procedures manual lying around
> > somewhere which speak to these matters. Maybe you could provide a link to
> > it.Many thanks
> > >
> > >Here is a link to the SCI's charter:
> > https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/2.+Charter. There is also a
> > public record of all the work done by the SCI on its wiki page, so take
> > time to browse through it, if you're interested.
> > >
> > >I hope this helps.
> > >
> > >Thanks.
> > >
> > >Amr