[CWG-Stewardship] PTI Board Composition

[Carlton Samuels]

I'm always a little tickled by the Orwellian turn of phrasing to mask plain
desires.  All this
'to'ing-and-fro'ing-on-the-one-hand-but-on-the-other-hand is for nought.

Here's an idea. Squint your eyes and re-read all the opinions, including
the 'personal' ones.  What comes out is that we favour a PTI Board of
'insiders' even as we would wish to project a semblance of 'separability'.
We desperately want to have our cake and cut our calories.

The contest is to figure out how to make some members - of the PTI Board -
more 'equal' than others!  Easy.  Make an ICANN employee a Board member.

Tch.

-CAS


==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================

On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
wrote:

> The ICANN Board is similarly composed of people named by the "community"
> including the NomCom and we are putting an immense effort into adding new
> accountability measures to protect us from them (forgive my wording but to
> a large extent, this IS what all this amounts to. Yes you are saying that
> this new PTI Board would not need any accountability?
>
> In my personal opinion, the ICANN Board needs community-selected members
> and "new blood" via the NomCom because the Board is overseeing a MS
> operation and must weigh and balance the desired and needs of the various
> parts of the community. On the other hand, the PTI Board is, as we have
> been repeatedly told, overseeing a relatively small and simple non-profit
> business and the Board has no such "balancing" needs.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
> At 24/05/2015 08:49 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to put a proposal on the table on the composition of the
>> PTI Board.
>>
>> Specifically
>>
>> On 22-May-15 18:32, Avri Doria wrote:
>> > * On the PTI Board, I believe it should be minimal, so instead of having
>> > a balanced multstakeholder set of individuals, it should have a majority
>> > of representatives (s)elected by a multistakeholder modality.   e.g 1
>> > ICANN Staff, 1 PTI Staff, 3 selected by ICANN Nomcom.
>>
>> Personally, I propose:
>>
>> 1 ICANN Staff as selected by ICANN President and endorsed by ICANN Board
>> 1 PTI Staff, typically the Sr. Officer of the PTI, i.e its President or
>> Executive Director or their designee
>> 3 Nomcom Selections
>> various liaisons as agreed after cross operational community discussions
>>
>> This PTI Board would have fewer people in it than the PTI staff has, but
>> would be large enough for some degree of diversity.
>>
>> While in a formal sense, this would seem to be an outside Board, given
>> that the majority is picked by the ICANN community instead of the ICANN
>> staff, it is an insider board when considered from the perspective of
>> ICANN as a multistakeholder run organization.
>>
>> It avoids the problem of deciding that one stakeholder type is more
>> appropriate that another, but allows the community on an annual basis to
>> decide which skills and knowledge are most important using a well
>> established ICANN method.  The skills and knowledge may vary over time,
>> including considerations such as operational experience,  financial
>> skill, international legal knowledge,  security capability, root zone
>> operator perspective, community policy perspective, DNS protocol or
>> system design expertise.  Those selected by the ICANN Nomcom could be
>> community insiders or outside experts, as decided by each Nomcom
>> according to the perceived needs at that time. The set of considerations
>> and needs would be decided on by the ICANN Nomcom in consultation with
>> ICANN Board & Staff, the multistakeholder community and PTI staff,
>> according to Nomcom's normal current and future practices.
>>
>> In terms of the current discussions, it allows us to defer certain
>> decisions, such as which skill and knowledge categories are most
>> appropriate until they can address future understandings.  It avoid
>> having the CWG micromanage the future of the PTI Board, yet leaves it
>> under the community's control.
>>
>>
>> thanks
>> avri
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> http://www.avast.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150524/566c1061/attachment-0001.html>