Re: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I also agree with Rafik.
Regards
Olga



2010/2/6 Zahid Jamil <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>

> I do think Rafik makes a valid point.
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Zahid Jamil
> Barrister-at-law
> Jamil & Jamil
> Barristers-at-law
> 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
> Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
> Cell: +923008238230
> Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
> Fax: +92 21 5655026
> www.jamilandjamil.com
>
> Notice / Disclaimer
> This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
> communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
> recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
> Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
> message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may
> contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law,
> and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client
> privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of
> any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing
> it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or
> incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written
> permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> ------------------------------
> *From: * Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Date: *Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:12:05 +0900
> *To: *Gomes, Chuck<cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Cc: *<gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO endorsement
> of AoC Review Team Volunteers
>
> Hi Chuck,
>
> I don't think that we can compromise in that point as the ongoing
> internationalization of ICANN is critical and I guess that is subject to
> accountability too.
> with a real constraint, we may urge SGs to involve their members from
> less-represented regions.
> the same case may happen somehow for gender balance too.
>
> Regards
>
> Rafik
>
> 2010/2/4 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>>  Thanks Rafik.  How would you suggest changing the process?  The proposed
>> wording is: "No more than two volunteers should come from the same
>> geographical region."  The key word is "should"; that was intentional
>> because if there are not qualified, volunteers from enough geographic
>> regions, what would we do?  The goal would be to not have more that two from
>> any one region, but that may not be achievable.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 04, 2010 2:03 AM
>>
>> *To:* Gomes, Chuck
>> *Cc:* gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
>> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO
>> endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
>>
>>
>> Hi Chuck,
>>
>>
>>    "have less than three geographic regions represented. ".
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I am uncomfortable with this point because in practice some regions wasn't
>> enough represented and this will allow the status quo for RT.
>>
>> if it is not late, no objection for extension.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> rafik
>>
>>
>