<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Kristina,<div><br></div><div>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:</div><div><br></div><div>*Will you be taking on board as well Chuck's suggestion,</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div class="Section1" style="page: Section1; "><div>On Jun 13, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div class="Section1" style="page: Section1; "><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0.5in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; text-indent: -0.25in; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); "><span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman'; "> </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">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></div></div></div></span></blockquote></div></div></span></blockquote></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div class="Section1" style="page: Section1; "><br></div><div class="Section1" style="page: Section1; ">*And/or merging yours with Wolf-Ulrich's</div><div class="Section1" style="page: Section1; "><br></div><div class="Section1" style="page: Section1; "><div>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:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><p><font size="2" face="Arial">The 2nd "Resolved" should read:</font> <font face="Times New Roman">Resolved further, that the GNSO Council should implement the Endorsement Process for<strike> all future AOC review team selections, including</strike> the “WHOIS Policy” and the “Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS” Review Teams;</font></p></div></blockquote><div><div><p><font face="Times New Roman">Cheers,</font></p><div><br></div></div></div><div>Bill</div></div></div></span></div><div><br></div><div><div><div>On Jun 14, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space">
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">see my comments interspersed below. I'll be offline
(for ICANN matters) until tomorrow.</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b>From:</b> 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<br></font><br></div>
<blockquote dir="ltr" style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div></div>Hello,
<div><br></div>
<div>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...</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">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. </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">KR: See note above. I've included below a revised
step-by-step. </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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 class="303412413-14062010"> </span></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif"><span class="303412413-14062010"> </span></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif">Scenario
2 (diversity goals not met):</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif">Step1:
Council receives 4 nominated SG candidates (1 from each SG)<span class="303412413-14062010"> and endorses all four.
However, </span>diversity goals are not met.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif">Step
2: Council then considers the <span class="303412413-14062010"> alternate candidates named by the
SGs</span>. If <span class="303412413-14062010"> 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, </span>see Step 3.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></o:p></div></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">KR: No need to worry. This was a misunderstanding.
</font> </span></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">KR: see above. </font> </span></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">KR: No, Bill. The language I suggested was:</font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font size="2"><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff">Change the now-third sentence of point 4 to read: <strong>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. </strong> <em>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.</em></font></font></font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><em><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></em></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">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. </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"> </span>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">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. </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"> </span>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 class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"></span> </div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">KR: There's no need for snarkiness,
Bill. </font></span></div>
<div><span class="303412413-14062010"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Bill</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Jun 14, 2010, at 6:24 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div lang="EN-US" style="WORD-WRAP: break-word" vlink="purple" link="blue">
<div class="Section1" style="page: Section1">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif">Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; POSITION: static; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none">
<div>
<div style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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<o:p></o:p></span></div></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif">Scenario
2 (diversity goals not met):</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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></div>
<blockquote style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in"><div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif; TEXT-ALIGN: center" align="center">
<hr align="center" width="100%" size="2">
</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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 style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">Hi
Chuck<o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">On
Jun 13, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<o:p></o:p></div></div>
<blockquote style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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></div></div>
<div style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif">1.</span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"> <span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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></div></div></div></blockquote>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">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></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><br><br><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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></div></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">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></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><br><br><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif">2.</span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"> <span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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></div></div>
<div style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif">3.</span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"> <span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); 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></div></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">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></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><br><br><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none">
<div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">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></div></div></div></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><br><br><o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<div style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none">
<div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><b><i><span style="COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)">[Gomes, Chuck]<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><span style="COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"> 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></div></div></div></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><br>That's
what you suggested as an alternative. Kristina's text
says<o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="MARGIN-TOP: 5pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt">
<div><p style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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<b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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 style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><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 style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">So
anyone in the applicant pool who has not been specifically endorsed for
possible consideration could not be considered.
<o:p></o:p></div></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">Best,<o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif">Bill<o:p></o:p></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman', serif"><o:p></o:p></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><br><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake">www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake</a><br>***********************************************************<br><br></div></span></span>
</div>
<br></div></body></html>