[gnso-arr-dt] FW: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Note the following message I just sent to the SOAC list regarding opening the 
call for AoC RT applicants.  As soon as we have our draft process, I would like 
to send it to Marco & Janis if no one objects. Can we finalize the proposed 
process not later than tomorrow so that Bill may send it to the Council list by 
then?  If so, then I will send it as a draft to Marco & Janis.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:36 PM
To: 'Marco Lorenzoni'; Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom
Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

The soonest the GNSO will be able to approve the GNSO endorsement process will 
be 10 June but we should be able to provide a proposed process in a few days.  
As long as it is properly qualified, I think it would be okay to post or refer 
to the proposed process until it is officially approved.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marco Lorenzoni [mailto:marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:38 PM
> To: Janis Karklins; Gomes, Chuck; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod
> Beckstrom
> Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> If there are no impediments due to SO/ACs still finalizing their
> selection processes, staff is ready to support at any moment.
> Deadline for applications mid-July? This will allow for some extra time
> for getting the applications even after the Bxl meeting.
> So, if I understand it clearly until now there are no objections to
> launch the call according to the same scheme we used for A&T
> (applications sent to a central address managed by staff, received
> applications sent by staff to relevant SO/ACs, SO/ACs will communicate
> their endorsements).
> One additional question: does any SO/AC require specific information
> from applicants additional to the CV and the Letter of motivation? This
> was the case for the A&T RT for GNSO, and should be mentioned in the
> text of the call since the beginning as to avoid ping-pongs with
> applicants.
> Best regards
> 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: Janis Karklins [janis.karklins@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 6:55 PM
> To: 'Gomes, Chuck'; Marco Lorenzoni; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod
> Beckstrom
> Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Not for me.
> 
> Are we all in agreement that the call for volunteers will go out in
> next 24 hours?
> 
> JK
> 
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: ceturtdiena, 2010. gada 27. maijā 18:48
> To: Janis Karklins; Marco Lorenzoni; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod
> Beckstrom
> Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> That would help a lot.  What about a deadline of 30 June?  Is that too
> soon?
> 
> Chuck
> 
> From: Janis Karklins [mailto:janis.karklins@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:46 PM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Marco Lorenzoni'; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod
> Beckstrom'
> Cc: 'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'; 'Olof Nordling'
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Why don’t we then launch a call for applications with deadline mid July
> which would give SO and AC ample time to consider endorsements.
> Selection would take place beginning of September and we will have
> sufficient run-up time for the first meeting.
> The only question is whether volunteers should manifest their interest
> to ICANN or to respective ACSO where they will be seeking endorsement.
> 
> JK
> 
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: ceturtdiena, 2010. gada 27. maijā 18:39
> To: Janis Karklins; Marco Lorenzoni; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod
> Beckstrom
> Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Janis,
> 
> Our endorsement process will start after the application period ends
> because we will decide who to endorse from the list of applications who
> list the GNSO as their group.
> 
> The timeline will be easier to deal with in future years than this
> year.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> From: Janis Karklins [mailto:janis.karklins@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:26 PM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Marco Lorenzoni'; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod
> Beckstrom'
> Cc: 'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'; 'Olof Nordling'
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Chuck,
> It is not so simple. A&T RT experience shows that the team needs some
> lead time to the first meeting. In the case of A&T it was more than a
> month.
> This should be factored in your calculations.
> I don’t see any reasons why SOs and ACs couldn’t start
> nomination/endorsement process immediately when we have informal
> agreement on the size and composition.  I hope to make a proposal once
> ALAC will provide me with its views on the subject.
> Best regards
> JK
> 
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: ceturtdiena, 2010. gada 27. maijā 18:18
> To: Marco Lorenzoni; Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod
> Beckstrom
> Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Thanks Marco.  I will forward this to our drafting team.  Our process
> will require time for SGs to endorse candidates and in some cases for
> the Council to take additional action after that; some SGs only meet
> every 3 weeks or longer and the Council meets every 3 weeks.  We will
> try to trim it down if possible.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> From: Marco Lorenzoni [mailto:marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 4:57 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod
> Beckstrom
> Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Chuck, thanks for the good news of the GNSO getting close to finalize
> this process.
> 45 days seems to me a too long period of time; let’s work backward
> based on this hypothesis.
> October 1st – beginning activities RTs 2 and 4
> September 20 – final list of candidates delivered to Selectors for
> selection of members
> August 1st – closing of the application period
> June 25 (end Bxl meeting) – launching of call for applicants.
> This means that the application period will run only for one month in
> July, summer holiday in this part of the world… >From my perspective
> this can have negative repercussions in terms of outreach.
> Would it be feasible to squeeze the ‘internal’ period down from 45 to 2
> weeks?
> Best regards
> 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, 27 May, 2010 01:47
> To: Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom
> Cc: Marco Lorenzoni; Donna Austin; Alice Jansen
> Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> The GNSO is getting close to finalizing an ongoing process for
> endorsing candidates and to help us to that I have one question for the
> Selectors and staff supporting the process:  The GNSO SGs will need
> some time after the end of the candidate application period ends to
> endorse candidates and once they do that, the GNSO Council may also
> have to act.  Would 45 days be too much time after close of the
> application period? Is it reasonable to think that that much time could
> be built into the process or is that too much?
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> From: owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-
> discussion@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Janis Karklins
> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 1:11 AM
> To: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod Beckstrom'
> Cc: 'Marco Lorenzoni'; 'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'
> Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
> 
> Dear colleagues
> 
> Two Affirmation-mandated reviews are to start on October 1st, namely
> the ‘Whois policy’; and ‘Security, Stability and Resiliency of the
> DNS’.
> The lesson we learned from the ‘Accountability and Transparency’
> experience is that the process leading to the establishment of a Review
> Team can be quite time-consuming. Hence my suggestion would be to start
> the preliminary activities for these upcoming reviews quite soon.
> 
> Based on our experience I would like to suggest the following sequence:
> 
> ·         Chairs consult their respective AC/SO on the size and
> composition of the both RTs – next 3 weeks.
> 
> ·         After agreement among Chairs on the issue above, the call for
> nominations is renewed and each AC/SO would endorse 2-3 time more
> candidates that agreed above – mid May – 20 June.
> 
> ·         Selectors make selection and announce composition of the both
> RTs at the end of the Brussels meeting.
> 
> Would this sequence be acceptable? Pls provide your comments at your
> earliest convenience.
> 
> Best regards
> JK
> 
> PS. The proposal has not been agreed yet by both Selectors. These are
> just my personal ideas. JK
>