<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010 Meetingly
- To: "Victoria McEvedy" <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>, "Claudio Di Gangi" <cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010 Meetingly
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 10:18:57 -0400
To me that seems like a valid point to raise Victoria.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 4:43 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010
Meetingly
Chuck -while people have talked about the shortage of volunteers
generally - this applies to all committees/and Groups generally.
Based on objections raised on WT calls it seems there are views
that Policy Committees involve special concerns as to transparency and
now to term limits and I don't believe there has been any real
discussion on the distinguishing features of the Policy Committees in
relation to these.
Regards,
Victoria McEvedy
Principal
McEvedys
Solicitors and Attorneys
96 Westbourne Park Road
London
W2 5PL
T: +44 (0) 207 243 6122
F: +44 (0) 207 022 1721
M: +44 (0) 7990 625 169
www.mcevedy.eu
Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for
the exclusive use of the addressee(s). This email and its attachments
may also be legally privileged. If you have received this in error,
please let us know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its
attachments without reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and
no retainer is created by this email communication.
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 07 April 2010 00:34
To: Victoria McEvedy; Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March 2010
Meetingly
Victoria,
It is not true that reasons have not been given. It would be
more accurate to say that you disagree with the reasons that have been
given.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March
2010 Meetingly
There has been repeated objection to the application of
any proposed standard rules to Policy committees ---but no reasons for
this have been articulated and I for one do not support their exclusion.
They lie at the heart of the work of the Groups.
Victoria McEvedy
Principal
McEvedys
Solicitors and Attorneys
96 Westbourne Park Road
London
W2 5PL
T: +44 (0) 207 243 6122
F: +44 (0) 207 022 1721
M: +44 (0) 7990 625 169
www.mcevedy.eu
Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
This email and its attachments are confidential and
intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). This email and its
attachments may also be legally privileged. If you have received this in
error, please let us know by reply immediately and destroy the email and
its attachments without reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
This email does not create a solicitor-client
relationship and no retainer is created by this email communication.
From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: 06 April 2010 14:33
To: Rafik Dammak; Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26 March
2010 Meetingly
It may be helpful to realize that the concept of
Executive Committees is now embedded in all the SG charters so there is
a particularly significant role for these committees. Also, the concept
of Executive Committees was not previously built in to the Constituency
concept except indiviudally by some constituencies so the BGC probably
didn't directly focus on these committees when recommending term limits.
With that understanding, a reasonable compromise might
be to apply term limits to Constituency/SG officers, Executive
Committees and Council Representatives and recommend them as a best
practice for other committees and subgroups.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Rafik Dammak
[mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:56 AM
To: Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26
March 2010 Meeting
Hi Claudio,
I am in favor of more strong wording, best
practice looks really optional and I am afraid that there won't be
willingness to apply it in groups.
for policy committees, they should be temporary
by their nature if my understanding is correct.
to apply term limit has to be applied for
executive committees.
Regards
Rafik
2010/4/6 Claudio Di Gangi <cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>
Rafik,
thanks, i appreciate your response.
would you recommend the best practice for term
limits apply only to the group's executive committee or to which group
committees?
under what basis is that distinction made?
claudio
________________________________________
From: Rafik Dammak [rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:40 PM
To: Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26
March 2010 Meeting
Thanks Claudio for your explanation, but I think
that we need to improve the current situation and recommend common best
practices. I may understand that few constituencies can face problem to
have people volunteering (even if I have real doubts about those facts),
I think that those constituencies have to work internally to improve the
situation and not asking for lowering standards.
I am not sure how the WT will handle that point,
but I am clearly not in favor of what you suggest.
@Olga @Michael I think that we need to make
decision about this point and not block the on going review of the rest
of document because the tight schedule we have
Regards
Rafik
2010/4/2 Claudio Di Gangi <
cdigangi@xxxxxxxx<mailto:cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>>
Rafik,
Just to further expand on my last reply to you:
In light of the complexities of the issues that
fall under ICANN's remit, it may be necessary or of great value to a
Group to have a volunteer serve on the executive committee or policy
committee for several consecutive terms before they have enough
experience and knowledge etc. to serve as Chair or in another similar
leadership position. That is if the Group is fortunate enough to have
such volunteers who are willing and able to dedicate the time and energy
necessary to serve in these positions in the first instance.
No matter how representative a group may be of
its community, one cannot assume that there will be endless pool of
willing volunteers to serve in these positions. On the contrary, what
likely matters more is what community or interest is being represented
by these Groups and how directly or indirectly ICANN's policies impact
them. Each group represents significantly varying interests that are
impacted by ICANN's policies is a markedly different way, so this
directly impacts participation. Therefore rules restricting
participation on committees can impact Groups very unequally, and this
is separate and aside from the issue of representativeness.
Therefore, I believe we need to thread very
carefully here. We have agreed to establishing term limits for
constituency officers, which implements the BGC recommendation we were
tasked with addressing. If groups want to expand term limits to other
areas of their operations based on their specifics, that is of course
something they are always able to do through their charters. If it's an
issue our work team feels very strongly about, then I suggest we
consider including it as a best practice.
Hope this was helpful.
claudio
From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:
rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 3:36 AM
To: Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 26
March 2010 Meeting
Hi Claudio,
I am confused about your suggestion as the limit
will be meaningless if it is not applied to executive committee.
if there is fears about volunteering, that issue
is more linked to representativeness level of Group.
"but I would not extend the term limit to
policy and executive committees. This is consistent with the BGC
recommendation which we are tasked with implementing, which states:
""There should be term limits for constituency officers, so as to help
attract new members and provide everyone with the chance to participate
in leadership positions."
and after the effort done for II.8 I am not in
favor of deletion.
Regards
Rafik
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of virus signature database 5004 (20100406) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of virus signature database 5004 (20100406) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
virus signature database 5005 (20100406) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
virus signature database 5005 (20100406) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|