<html 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="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<!--[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 Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</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-AU link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space'>
<div class=WordSection1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I think it is a great conversation topic.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>If we are not allowed to act without conferring with our SG’s
why is there a number of us.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>You may as well have one person with three votes (for the RrSG
anyway...)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Adrian Kinderis</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br>
<br>
</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, 14 June 2010 8:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Adrian Kinderis<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Gomes, Chuck; Rosette, Kristina; 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 Adrian<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>On Jun 14, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Bill,</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>. 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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Is this not the same debate as “participatory vs
representative”?</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>FWIW I'd say it's related but different. In our
discussion prior I suggested we should allow participation subject to the
agreed conditions rather than following a strictly representational model in
which people could only "speak" through their Councilors, but I
certainly didn't suggest that we're not elected to represent them.
Whereas what Kristina seems to be saying is that only SGs can take
decisions on nominees and Council action would hence be independent of the
community, which would imply we don't represent it. But maybe I'm failing
to read between these lines correctly...<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>For what it is worth, I share the same quandary.</span><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I didn't realize the Council was so ontologically
challenged. Would this merit a group conversation in some setting, e.g.
the Saturday dinner?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Bill<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm;
border-width:initial;border-color:initial'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span class=apple-converted-space><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><a
href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span>[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]<span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span
class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>William Drake<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Monday, June 14,
2010 6:17 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Rosette, Kristina;
GNSO Council List; Knobenw<br>
<b>Subject:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Re: [council] AoC
RT Endorsement Process, Motion, and Amendments</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Hello,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><b>up to
two additional candidates</b>..." Two additional is additive,
not substitutive. 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. 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. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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<span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><b>additional</b><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span>candidates,<span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><b>from among those identified by the
stakeholder groups</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>under item
2." That plainly means only those identified by the stakeholder
groups under item 2, there's no misunderstanding here. 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. 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? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Bill<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>On Jun 14, 2010, at 6:24 AM, Gomes, Chuck
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Chuck</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid windowtext 3.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;
border-width:initial;border-color:initial;border-width:initial;border-color:
initial;z-index:auto'>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 3.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm;
border-width:initial;border-color:initial;border-width:initial;border-color:
initial'>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span class=apple-converted-space><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>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><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>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><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>Scenario 2 (diversity goals not met):</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>Step1: Council receives 4 nominated SG candidates (1 from
each SG), but diversity goals are not met.</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>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><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>If my proposed amendments did not make that clear, please
let me at what step they weren't clear enough.</span><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span lang=EN-US>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
class=apple-converted-space><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:10.0pt;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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Hi Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>On Jun 13, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>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><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style='margin-left:36.0pt'>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>1.</span><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'> <span
class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style='margin-left:36.0pt'>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>(One
flaw with this as Bill noted in our meeting last week is that an SG could
submit all remaining candidates as alternates.)</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style='margin-left:36.0pt'>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>2.</span><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'> <span
class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>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><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style='margin-left:36.0pt'>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>3.</span><span
lang=EN-US style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'> <span
class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid windowtext 3.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;
border-width:initial;border-color:initial;border-width:initial;border-color:
initial'>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>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></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid windowtext 3.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;
border-width:initial;border-color:initial;border-width:initial;border-color:
initial'>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><i><span lang=EN-US style='color:#1F497D'>[Gomes, Chuck]<span
class=apple-converted-space> </span></span></i></b><span lang=EN-US
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 lang=EN-US> </span></span><span
lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>
That's what you suggested as an alternative. Kristina's text says<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;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><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>So anyone in the applicant pool who has not
been specifically endorsed for possible consideration could not be considered. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Bill<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>***********************************************************<br>
William J. Drake<br>
Senior Associate<br>
Centre for International Governance<br>
Graduate Institute of International and<br>
Development Studies<br>
Geneva, Switzerland<br>
<a href="mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch">william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch</a><br>
<a href="http://www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html">www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US><a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake">www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake</a><br>
***********************************************************<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:black'>***********************************************************<br>
William J. Drake<br>
Senior Associate<br>
Centre for International Governance<br>
Graduate Institute of International and<br>
Development Studies<br>
Geneva, Switzerland<br>
<a href="mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch">william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch</a><br>
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:13.5pt'><span style='font-size:13.5pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake">www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake</a><br>
***********************************************************<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>