<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
FW: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
- To: <gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: FW: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 08:37:04 -0500
Note the request below from Marco. Realizing that this depends on our
progress in our call in a few minutes, I request that we discuss this at
the end of the call.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Marco Lorenzoni [mailto:marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 3:42 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Marika Konings; Liz Gasster
Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO endorsement
of AoC Review Team Volunteers
Good morning Chuck, two questions:
1) Is the DT Ok with the sharing of your methodology with ccNSO, as
suggested by Peter?
2) Marika told me that today you'll have a Council call on
selection of volunteers. Do you want me to participate? No problem from
my side, I can make it for about one hour if it can be of help.
Thanks
Marco
Marco Lorenzoni
---------------------
ICANN
Director, Organizational Review
marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx
Phone: +32.2.234 78 69
Mobile: +32.475.72 47 47
Fax: +32 2 234 7848
Skype: marco_lorenzoni
---------------------
6, Rond Point Schuman
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, 04 February, 2010 14:49
To: Marco Lorenzoni
Cc: Marika Konings
Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO endorsement
of AoC Review Team Volunteers
Thank you very much Marco. I personally am okay with sharing the draft
endorsement plan with the ccNSO but want to check with the DT members to
see if anyone has any concerns.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Marco Lorenzoni [mailto:marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 4:44 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Marika Konings
Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO
endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
Importance: High
Chuck, both Peter and Janis agree on a one-week extension of the
deadline, no problem.
I will announce it on Mon, just yesterday we published a
reminder of the deadline a few hours before your exchange of email and
would not like to create confusion.
Peter suggests also to share your draft endorsement process with
ccNSO, they might be interested to work on the same line; do you have
any objection / do you have a consolidated version to circulate?
Thanks
Marco
Marco Lorenzoni
---------------------
ICANN
Director, Organizational Review
marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx
Phone: +32.2.234 78 69
Mobile: +32.475.72 47 47
Fax: +32 2 234 7848
Skype: marco_lorenzoni
---------------------
6, Rond Point Schuman
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, 03 February, 2010 18:10
To: Marco Lorenzoni
Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for GNSO
endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
Thanks Marco. Much appreciated.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Marco Lorenzoni [mailto:marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:58 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Subject: FW: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for
GNSO endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
Chuck, I saw this and just asked Peter and Janis if they
are positive on this possibility.
If I receive something even before your formal request I
let you know.
Thanks
Marco
Marco Lorenzoni
---------------------
ICANN
Director, Organizational Review
marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx
Phone: +32.2.234 78 69
Mobile: +32.475.72 47 47
Fax: +32 2 234 7848
Skype: marco_lorenzoni
---------------------
6, Rond Point Schuman
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
------ Forwarded Message
From: Chuck Gomes <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:50:54 -0800
To: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Some ideas for a process for
GNSO endorsement of AoC Review Team Volunteers
That is exactly what I was thinking Bill. But I didn't
want to make the request unless I had a sense that the DT members
support me doing so. Does anyone object to me sending a request to the
Board/Staff asking for a "one week extension of time beyond 17 February
(i.e., 24 Feb) for Council endorsement of GNSO volunteers"? If I hear
no objections today, I will send it.
Chuck
________________________________
From: William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:46 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
Thanks for the detailed suggestions Chuck. Obviously we
need to know first if they will extend the timeline, as Marco
previously rejected that possibility and said Janis and Peter will be
Selectors on the 20th. If everyone agrees, as Chair could you fire off
the extension request, and when we know either way we can work through
the rest?
Best,
Bill
On Feb 2, 2010, at 10:53 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I appreciate the good discussion going on today and
just now found some time to jump in. Here are some ideas that may help
us move forward in both the near term and longer term regarding a GNSO
endorsement process.
I think it would be helpful if we work on two separate
endorsement processes: 1) one for the first review team that has a very
short window; 2) one for the long term that could be applied for
endorsement of volunteers for future RTs. I understand that the "Call
for Applicants for the Position of Volunteer Review Team Member"
(http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13jan10-en.htm)
covers all four reviews but the only deadline set is for the first
review (Accountability and Transparency), 17 February. To work within
this very short timeframe, I think it will be impossible to develop a
quality long-term process and do it using a bottom-up approach that
involves the broader GNSO community. That is why I think we should
first narrow our focus on a one-time process to address the immediate
need and then spend more time in the next month or two on developing a
better process that we can more thoroughly vet. Using the various
ideas that members of our DT proposed on this list and taking into
consideration the very tight time constraints, I propose the following
for the one-time process:
1. ASAP: 1) send a request to the Board/Staff for
a one week extension of time beyond 17 February (i.e., 24 Feb) for
Council endorsement of GNSO volunteers; 2) send a request to Staff
requesting that applications received from volunteers for the
Accountability and Transparency RT be forwarded to the GNSO Secretariat
as soon as possible after receipt for distribution to the Council list
and other GNSO organization lists; 3) notify GNSO community members
that the GNSO endorsement process is under development and encourage
volunteers from the GNSO to submit applications via the ICANN process;
4) request that SGs, Constituencies and other GNSO groups encourage
volunteers from their communities to submit applications via the ICANN
process.
2. 10 Feb: 1) finalize a draft one-time process
for the first Accountability and Transparency RT and distribute to the
Council with a motion for Council approval; 2) publicly post and
distribute draft process GNSO groups; 3) send draft process to ICANN
Staff and request that it be sent as soon as possible to all GNSO
volunteers with a request that they complete the GNSO request for
information and send it to the GNSO Secretariat by 17 Feb or as soon
thereafter as possible but not later than 22 Feb
3. 18 Feb: 1) Council approval of the one-time
process; 2) Council review & discussion of nominees identified to date;
3) form an evaluation team made up of one Councilor from each SG plus
one NCA to rate the responses and report to the Council list not later
than 23 Feb; request that the AoC Review DT continue its work to
develop a longer-term process for Council consideration in March or
April.
4. 24 Feb: Hold a brief Council teleconference
call to review volunteers and finalize the list of volunteers endorsed
by the GNSO for the 2010 Accountability and Transparency RT.
Proposed Details for GNSO Endorsements
The GNSO Council will endorse up to six volunteers for
the 2010 AoC Accountability and Transparency RT as follows:
* Endorsement requires a simple majority vote of
each house.
* Assuming their are volunteers who receive the
necessary Council votes, at least one volunteer should be endorsed from
each house.
* No more than two volunteers should come from
the same geographical region.
* Volunteers must not all be of the same gender
and at least 1/3 of each gender should be represented if possible.
* In cases where more than six total or more than
one from a SG receive at least a simple majority from each house, ties
will be broken as follows, in the order presented: 1) geographical
and/or gender diversity; 2) the total votes received; 3) the Council
non-voting NCA will be asked to break the tie. (We should check with
Andrei to make he is okay with this.)
Notes: a) Endorsement is not automatic just because
there are less than six volunteers or because a volunteer is from a SG
for which there is no other volunteer or for geographical or gender
reasons; b) having appropriate skill and knowledge sets is the most
important qualification and hopefully the requirement for at least a
simple majority of each house will facilitate that goal; c) it is
possible to endorse less than six volunteers, to endorse no one from a
SG, to not endorse volunteers from both genders and/or have less than
three geographic regions represented. .
***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
***********************************************************
------ End of Forwarded Message
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|