<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt =
"uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s =
"uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z = "#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html =
"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q =
"http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc =
"http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" XMLNS:D = "DAV:" XMLNS:Repl =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2 =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda =
"http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds =
"http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd =
"http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec =
"http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi =
"http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi =
"http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver =
"http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels =
"http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp =
"http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl =
"http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService"
XMLNS:Z = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st = ""><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.17023" name=GENERATOR><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
o\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
w\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
.shape {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
P {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.apple-style-span {
mso-style-name: apple-style-span
}
SPAN.apple-converted-space {
mso-style-name: apple-converted-space
}
SPAN.EmailStyle22 {
COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
.MsoChpDefault {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-style-type: export-only
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
vLink=purple link=blue>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=912260816-14062010><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>That shouldn't be a problem, but I'll
confirm.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=912260816-14062010><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=912260816-14062010><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>K</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Gomes, Chuck
[mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 14, 2010 12:07
PM<BR><B>To:</B> William Drake; Rosette, Kristina<BR><B>Cc:</B> GNSO Council
List; Knobenw<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [council] AoC RT Endorsement Process,
Motion, and Amendments<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">It
would be good if you can include my suggestion Kristina. That would
avoid a separate amendment. But it is your call.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">Chuck<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'"> William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 14,
2010 12:05 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Rosette, Kristina<BR><B>Cc:</B> Gomes, Chuck; GNSO
Council List; Knobenw<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [council] AoC RT Endorsement
Process, Motion, and Amendments<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Hi Kristina,<o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Ok great, we just misread bits of each others' wordings
(how could that ever happen in a list discussion..?). So your proposal
is not four only and not that Council can never discuss people in the pool who
weren't listed by SGs, but rather that it cannot discuss them unless the ones
who were listed do not enhance diversity. Capito. I'd still prefer
the more open approach and suspect this will unnecessarily routinize
strategizing etc, but whatever. So if you send an amendment tomorrow
we're good to go. Two questions on that:<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>*Will you be taking on board as well Chuck's
suggestion,<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">On Jun 13,
2010, at 4:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: #1f497d"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">I
would add one new wrinkle to this: SG’s should only propose alternates that
are of a different geographical location or gender than their primary
candidate. In fact this would probably be a useful amendment to the
original motion.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">*And/or merging
yours with Wolf-Ulrich's<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">On Jun 10, 2010,
at 10:48 PM, <<A
href="mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de">KnobenW@telekom.de</A>> <<A
href="mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de">KnobenW@telekom.de</A>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<DIV>
<P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">The 2nd
"Resolved" should read:</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt">Resolved further, that the GNSO Council should
implement the Endorsement Process for<S> all future AOC review team
selections, including</S> the “WHOIS Policy” and the “Security,
Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS” Review Teams;</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt">Cheers,</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Bill<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>On Jun 14, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Rosette, Kristina
wrote:<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">see my
comments interspersed below. I'll be offline (for ICANN matters) until
tomorrow.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center>
<HR align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'"> William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 14,
2010 4:17 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Gomes, Chuck<BR><B>Cc:</B> Rosette, Kristina; GNSO
Council List; Knobenw<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [council] AoC RT Endorsement
Process, Motion, and Amendments</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal>Hello, <o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>It seems there are two levels to this discussion.
The broader one concerns the nature and role of the Council.
Kristina argues that the Council " has been greatly restricted in
the restructuring and the initially proposed mechanism goes beyond that
role," and that "having a slightly more complicated process at the SG level
is far preferable to having the Council take on an SG role and make
nominations independent of the community." I wasn't around when the
veterans among us were having the constitutional discussions leading to
Council reform, so I guess I'm not sufficiently clueful on how everyone sees
this. While I understand that Council is now supposed to be more a
coordinator/facilitator of community processes than the doer of all things,
I did not take this to mean that it cannot legitimately make decisions via
votes on matters like adding a person or two to enhance the diversity of the
GNSO's RT nominations because that would be acting independently of the
community. I thought we were elected to represent our respective
slices of the community and after consulting with them could act in their
names, and if they don't like what we've done we get unelected in the next
cycle. So then what decisions can we take that do not
constitute acting independently of the community, where's the boundary
line? If I'm the only one who is perplexed I hope someone will
straighten me out in Brussels...<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Anyway, on the issue at hand, Chuck your understanding of
the drafting team's proposal is not different from everyone else's.
The text clearly says "The Council will consider the resulting
list of up to four nominees at its next teleconference. If
the list does not meet the above mentioned diversity objectives, the
Council as a whole may choose to endorse <B>up to two additional
candidates</B>..." Two additional is additive, not
substitutive. <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR:
The distinction between additional and substitutive was not clear to me and
to many others. (I suspect it was the multiple uses of the word
additional.) I'm pleased to know it's truly additional; that's
helpful. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>To my knowledge, the notion that after considering
diversity options the Council would endorse only four (Kristina's Step 2,
below) is new, it wasn't included in the amendment language she sent to the
list (quoted at the bottom) and I don't recall anyone suggesting it on the
call. <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR:
See note above. I've included below a revised
step-by-step. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Scenario
1 (diversity goals met with SG nominees): Council receives 4 nominated
(or whatever we're calling them) candidates (1 from each SG), diversity
goals are satisfied, so Council endorses all four
candidates. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Scenario
2 (diversity goals not met):</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Step1:
Council receives 4 nominated SG candidates (1 from each SG) and
endorses all four. However, diversity goals are not
met.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Step
2: Council then considers the alternate candidates named by
the SGs. If selecting one or two of these
alternate candidates will result in a slate that overall meets
diversity goals, Council may endorse up to two of them in addition to
the candidates endorsed in Step 1. If not, see Step
3.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Step
3: Council then considers all remaining persons in the applicant pool
(e.g., all persons who submitted applications but
weren't nomiated by SGs or identified as "additional candidates).
The last sentence in my number 4 was directed to this
step.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>From my standpoint, this is even more problematic than
what we were talking about previously. It would either a)
astronomically politicize the process by raising the prospect that Council
could overturn SG's one-per endorsements, leading to inter-SG squabbling
over whose gets dumped and associated bad feelings...and talk about
undercutting SG sovereignty!; or b) create really strong disincentives to do
anything to enhance diversity in order to avoid that
scenario. <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR:
No need to worry. This was a misunderstanding.
</SPAN> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>The whole point of the drafting team proposal was to make
the process simple and apolitical, driven in large part by the fact that the
ATRT model with the two competitive seats appeared to generate a lot of
confusion and agitation within one SG in Nairobi. This proposal would
plunge us far in the opposite direction.<SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR:
see above. </SPAN> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Circling back to what we were talking about yesterday,
the text below that Kristina sent Thursday during the call says, "the
Council as a whole may choose to endorse up to two <B>additional</B>
candidates, <B>from among those identified by the stakeholder groups</B>
under item 2." That plainly means only those identified by the
stakeholder groups under item 2, there's no misunderstanding
here. <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR:
No, Bill. The language I suggested was:</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Change
the now-third sentence of point 4 to read: <STRONG><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">If, however, the list does not
meet the above mentioned diversity objectives, the Council as a whole may
choose to endorse up to two additional candidates, from among those
identified by the stakeholder groups under item 2, who would help to give
the list of GNSO nominees the desired balance. </SPAN></STRONG>
<EM><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">If consideration of
these additional stakeholder group-identified candidates does not meet the
diversity objectives, the Council may refer to the GNSO applicant pool to
identify these additional
candidates.</SPAN></EM></SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">As
my language proposed, the Council would first look to the additional
(perhaps calling them alternate as I've done above would be helpful)
candidates, if any, identified by the SGs. (The bolded language
above) If considering the alternate candidates does not meet the
diversity goals (the italicized language), the Council then looks to the
entire pool. Chuck's interpretation of my proposal is correct.
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> In yesterday's message she instead proposes what
Chuck suggested on the call, that the rest of the pool could in fact be
considered, but only after Council has discussed SGs' back-up endorsements.
This is better from the standpoint of those of us who think Council
should be able to consider the whole pool, but as I said yesterday it's not
obvious why we would need to legislate what we would undoubtedly do anyway
based on common sense and courtesy. <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR: See
above as to what I proposed. As for common sense and courtesy, it would
be great if we could rely on that. However, in the absence of a
procedure to the contrary, there's no guarantee. That's not something
we're willing to leave to chance. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> But if it makes folks happier....While we're at it,
maybe we should also codify the precise sequence of the discussion, i.e. the
order in which SG back-ups get considered and the time allotted to
each? <SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">KR: There's
no need for snarkiness, Bill. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Best,<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Bill<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>On Jun 14, 2010, at 6:24 AM, Gomes, Chuck
wrote:<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">All
this makes me think that my understanding may be different than everyone
else. I understood that endorsements by the SGs would remain
regardless of what the Council might do to improve diversity. If the
Council was successful at gaining support for one or two candidates that
improved the diversity of the pool, then the pool of endorsed candidates
would increase to 5 or 6 depending on whether one or two additional
candidates were selected. The difference as I understood it between
what Kristina proposed and the original procedure, which is apparently
wrong, was that the step in the original procedures the Council would look
at the full slate of candidates seeking GNSO endorsement while what I
thought Kristina suggested was that the Council would first look at SG named
alternates first and only if that was unsuccessful would they look at the
full slate of candidates seeking GNSO
endorsement.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">Chuck</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">Rosette,
Kristina [mailto:krosette@cov.com]<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Sunday, June 13, 2010 10:17
PM<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>William
Drake; Gomes, Chuck<BR><B>Cc:</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>GNSO Council List;
Knobenw<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>RE:
[council] AoC RT Endorsement Process, Motion, and
Amendments</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">I
hope I'm responding to the most recent message. If not, would someone please
forward it? (All of my email rules have disappeared and I now have
thousands of messages in my in box.)</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">The
concern driving the proposed amendment is that the Council's role has been
greatly restricted in the restructuring and the initially proposed mechanism
goes beyond that role. The greater specificity in the process, the
greater the certainty. There was concern that the Council would move
directly to the broader applicant pool without considering the SG additional
candidates.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">To
avoid any confusion about my proposed amendments (and it appears there may
be some), here's the step-by-step for the two
scenarios</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Scenario
1 (diversity goals met with SG nominees): Council receives 4 nominated
(or whatever we're calling them) candidates (1 from each SG), diversity
goals are satisfied, so Council endorses all four
candidates. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Scenario
2 (diversity goals not met):</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Step1:
Council receives 4 nominated SG candidates (1 from each SG), but diversity
goals are not met.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Step
2: Council then considers the 6 additional candidates (2 SGs named 1,
2 SGs named 2) named by the SGs. If consideration of these additonal
candidates results in a slate that meets diverseity goals, Council endorses
4 candidates. If not, see Step 3.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Step
3: Council then considers all remaining persons in the applicant pool
(e.g., all persons who submitted applications but
weren't nomiated by SGs or identified as "additional candidates).
The last sentence in my number 4 was directed to this
step.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">If my
proposed amendments did not make that clear, please let me at what
step they weren't clear enough.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in"><DIV
class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center>
<HR align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'"> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'">William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch]<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><BR><B>Sent:</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:30
AM<BR><B>To:</B><SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Gomes,
Chuck<BR><B>Cc:</B><SPAN class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>GNSO
Council List; Rosette, Kristina; Knobenw<BR><B>Subject:</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Re: [council] AoC RT Endorsement
Process, Motion, and Amendments</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Hi Chuck<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>On Jun 13, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck
wrote:<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">I
personally support the motion as proposed because I think the required
threshold of 60% of each house for any additional candidates provides
more than enough protection to ensure SG support. That would
require 5 affirmative votes for the CPH and 8 affirmative votes of the
NCPH, so no SG could control the vote, not even with the NCA vote.
With that protection, it seems problematic to add more complexity to the
process.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">At
the same time, if there are those who cannot support the original motion
as is, I think I could support a modification that would do the
following:</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">1.</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: #1f497d"> <SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">If
the Council decides to try to improve the diversity of the pool of GNSO
endorsed candidates, they would first consider those alternate
candidates proposed by the SGs, if
any. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Wouldn't we do this anyone as a matter of courtesy and
common sense without codifying it? If there's a pool of 8 candidates
and SGs have come to internal agreement that they could support persons x
y and z, presumably their reps would indicate that when the conversation
begins and we'd commence talking about x y and z before moving on to the
five nobody had yet preferred. Would anyone really say well, your SG
may like Ms. x but I refuse to talk about her and insist we start with
someone nobody's said they favor?<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">(One
flaw with this as Bill noted in our meeting last week is that an SG could
submit all remaining candidates as
alternates.)</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>After I said that, somewhat in jest, Kristina specified
in the amendment, "notify Council of one or two additional candidates whom
it could support, if available." <o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">2.</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: #1f497d"> <SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">If
the Council is unable to approve any additional candidates to improve
diversity of the pool using only SG proposed alternates, then they
could consider the entire set of candidates requesting GNSO
endorsement.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">3.</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: #1f497d"> <SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'">I
would add one new wrinkle to this: SG’s should only propose alternates
that are of a different geographical location or gender than their primary
candidate. In fact this would probably be a useful amendment to the
original motion.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>I'd favor that, but not if it's tied to prohibiting the
Council from even considering people who were not so
designated.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>What the IPC is proposing is that only
applicants that SGs have previously designated as acceptable back-ups
could even be considered by the Council for this
purpose.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d">[Gomes, Chuck]<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN></I></B><SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d"> I didn’t understand it as this
restrictive. I thought Kristina said that the SG alternatives would
be considered first; then if that didn’t result in a successful
resolution, other candidates could be considered.</SPAN><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR>That's what you suggested as an alternative.
Kristina's text says<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<DIV>
<P><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">3.
Change third bullet of #2 to read: Each stakeholder group is
encouraged to (a) identify in its internal deliberations and (b) notify
Council of<SPAN class=apple-converted-space><B> </B></SPAN><B>one
or two additional candidates</B><SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN>whom it could support, if
available, in the event that the diversity procedure outlined in item 4
below is utilized. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<DIV>
<P><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">4.
Change the now-third sentence of point 4 to read: If, however, the list
does not meet the above mentioned diversity objectives, the Council as a
whole may choose to endorse up to two additional candidates, f<B>rom
among those identified by the stakeholder groups under item 2,<SPAN
class=apple-converted-space> </SPAN></B>who would help to give the
list of GNSO nominees the desired balance. If consideration of
these additional stakeholder group-identified candidates does not meet
the diversity objectives, the Council may refer to the GNSO applicant
pool to identify these additional
candidates.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>So anyone in the applicant pool who has not been
specifically endorsed for possible consideration could not be considered.
<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Best,<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P
class=MsoNormal>Bill<o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN class=apple-style-span><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 13.5pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13.5pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><A
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake">www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake</A><BR>***********************************************************</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV></DIV>
<P
class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>