Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee

["waudo siganga" <emailsignet@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear George, All - I was actually a member of the BC (representing
WITSA) when I served on the NonCom. However I concur with Marylin's
views fully with regard to a strategic, big picture approach to the
interests of the Business Community. Perhaps the secretariat can give
some information on whther we have BC members from parts of the world
where we need to strengthen our reach (developing countries) and who
they are.

Meantime I look forward to the BC making early preparation for outreach
activity to attract more members from Africa when we converge in my home
town, Nairobi, next March.   

Finally, I can say that the Nom-Com work requires a lot of personal
sacrifice in terms of time and effort. Liz and Phil require our
appreciation. 

Kind Regards,
Dr. Waudo Siganga
Vice-President
WITSA-Africa Region

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:13 -0400, "George Kirikos" <icann@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I would welcome Mike Roberts' participation, if he was interested in
> the position.
> 
> I believe there are multiple precedents for this. Wasn't Grant
> Forsythe a NomCom rep for the BC, even though he wasn't in the BC? And
> Waudo Singanga?
> 
> Frankly, there would be greater participation in the BC if membership
> fees were lower or simply eliminated. This could easily be achieved by
> reducing the ginormous overspending on irrelevant/duplicative
> activities, running down the reserve to reasonable levels, taking
> advantage of the GNSO "toolkit", etc.
> 
> I renew the request that the BC Budget should be public and posted on
> either the BC website or this public mailing list, in order to add
> transparency and accountability, in a similar way as ICANN files its
> IRS Form 990 disclosures. Similarly there should be a public list of
> all individuals and organizations that have received payments from the
> BC, and the relevant amounts.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> http://www.leap.com/
> 
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Marilyn Cade<marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > I think that discussions like this are better when they are general in
> > nature and not only statements between individuals.  So, I'll thank Liz for
> > her response on a more personal basis, but take this back to a more general
> > proposal and discussion for all BC members interests.
> > My proposal was that the BC members think more strategically about NOT
> > 'necessarily' requiring membership for a highly qualified candidate from the
> > business user community to be considered as a NomCom member.
> > Of course, within the BC and the GNSO, there are a lot of improvements and
> > changes underway. However, we all are aware that the BC is about  GNSO
> > policy areas, which is the primary purpose and focus of the BC, as a
> > constituency of the GNSO.
> > That is very important, and of course, the BC elected councilors will vote
> > on two Board members elected from the GNSO Policy Council.
> > However, the larger issues of concern about governance of the organization
> > are actually NOT about GNSO policy, but broader issues, such as the
> > stability of the organization, how it co exists in a larger public policy
> > arena that has the IGF, ITU as 'sister players', and is also about an ever
> > improved interaction between the other parts of the stakeholder community.
> > Some growth in BC membership would be great, and as the services of the BC
> > grow, and the merger with the other commercial user constituencies takes
> > place, we will probably be assessing how and what to improve in the kinds of
> > information and activities that are going to support the GNSO "commercial
> > user house".
> > Selecting a very senior, highly respected leader like Mike might lead to his
> > being chosen as vice chair of the NomCom -- something that won't happen if
> > we are sending someone that is viewed as tightly tied to particular policy
> > perspectives. And, after all, the Board selection is about governance -- not
> > about GNSO policy positions per se.
> > At the same time, we need to recognize that the GNSO Policy Council will be
> > electing board members, and that the ALAC is seeking elected board seats --
> > to achieve that change will take major changes in the NomCom process.
> > Reform and modification of the NomCom procedures/scope, accountability, and
> > some form of reasonable transparency are all going to need work and
> > attention.
> > That won't be done by the folks are who are 'within' the NomCom, of course,
> > so is something to be aware of.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > CC: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
> > From: lizawilliams@xxxxxxx
> > To: marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee
> > Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:15:20 +0100
> >
> > Marilyn
> > I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC.   As one of three
> > members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials
> > Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him.
> > However, asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of
> > standing for election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee
> > seems to be rather a stretch.
> > I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job
> > in a highly complex environment which is very time consuming.  I would also
> > suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business
> > Constituency in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment
> > to the broader ICANN community.
> > As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating
> > Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open
> > to suggestions for improvements.  We have both provided regular updates to
> > the BC but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating
> > Committee provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee
> > itself.  Of course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be
> > made public (that is everything but candidate names and their details) is
> > available here http://nomcom.icann.org/
> > Kind regards.
> > Liz
> > On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> >
> > I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see
> > that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from
> > the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all
> > members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the
> > Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise
> > owner, and highly respected around the globe.
> > Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about
> > 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm.
> > I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for
> > selection from the BC.
> > We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or
> > his counterpart from another part of the globe.
> > Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that
> > from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other
> > parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt
> > rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm
> > role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those
> > who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open
> > conference call for all BC members interested to listen in.
> > Marilyn Cade
> > ICT Strategies
> > mCADE llc
> > micro enterprise member of BC
> >
> >
> >
>