[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership Team - Deadline for objections Wed 10 Feb at 18.00 UTC

Tue Feb 9 21:30:44 UTC 2016

I agree with Jim, Marc and Steve that in the future greater clarity is 
necessary regarding such polls.  However, I certainly support the 
current configuration and am grateful for their forbearance in agreeing 
to move forward.  And thanks to all who came forward as leadership 
candidates.
stephanie perrin

On 2016-02-09 14:53, Metalitz, Steven wrote:
>
> I agree with Marc and Jim and would note that the e-mail providing the 
> link to the candidate poll stated “ endorsement is not a binding vote 
> – it is simply an indication of support.”
>
> I also think the consensus reached on the call was limited to Chuck’s 
> leadership role.  However,  since Chuck  has indicated that he 
> supports having a leadership team consisting of the  “top 4” from the 
> poll, I am certainly comfortable supporting that.
>
> Steve Metalitz
>
> *From:*gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org 
> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Anderson, Marc
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 09, 2016 1:48 PM
> *To:* James Galvin; gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership Team - Deadline 
> for objections Wed 10 Feb at 18.00 UTC
>
> I agree with Jim on all points.
>
> I'm not objecting as I feel comfortable that a leadership team with 
> Chuck as chair supported by Susan, Michele and David in a 
> configuration that they will propose to the rest of the working group 
> will do an excellent job. I also recognize and agree with the point 
> made on today's call that we need to select a leadership team and move 
> forward.
>
> I do want to echo Jim's point about the purpose of the pole. It seemed 
> to me that the pole was created in response to the volume of email 
> created by people "seconding" candidates applying for leadership 
> positions. Like Jim I did not participate in the candidate support 
> poll but did participate in the leadership characteristics poll. I 
> certainly would have participated in the candidate poll had I know it 
> would be used in this manner. I don't think it's necessary to re-open 
> to poll.
>
> While Chuck as chair isn't one of them, this PDP will be dealing with 
> a number of contentious items and it's essential that we are clear in 
> what we are asking and communicating going forward.
>
> Thank you,
> Marc
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> 
> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James Galvin
> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 1:24 PM
> To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership Team - Deadline 
> for objections Wed 10 Feb at 18.00 UTC
>
> This is not an objection but I do want to repeat the comment I made 
> during the meeting we just had.
>
> First, I’m not objecting because I appreciate that we operate with a 
> consensus driven process and this call for any objections is a tool in 
> that process.
>
> However, the concern I stated during the meeting is that when the poll 
> was created it was never clearly stated that it was going to be used 
> as a consensus judging tool to select the leadership.
>
> Less than 1 third of the working group members responded to the 
> opportunity to indicate support for leadership candidates while almost 
> 2 thirds responded to the opportunity to identify desirable 
> characteristics. If you just look at the numbers clearly the “top 4” 
> could change dramatically if more people had participated in the poll, 
> and I have to believe that more would have participated if they had 
> known it would be important to do so.
>
> In the interest of full disclosure, I did not participate in the 
> candidate support poll while I did participate in the leadership 
> characteristics poll.
>
> It is essential that “formal questions” be clearly stated as such so 
> that working group members have an opportunity to fully evaluate the 
> consequences of their actions (or non-actions).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 Feb 2016, at 12:42, Marika Konings wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Those on the RDS PDP WG call today, agreed to confirm Chuck Gomes as
> > Chair of the RDS PDP WG.
> >
> > It was also agreed that WG members should be given an opportunity to
> > indicate any concerns you may have with moving forward with the top
> > four candidates that were identified in the poll, namely Chuck Gomes,
> > Susan Kawaguchi, Michele Neylon and David Cake (see
> > https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-STDRVQ3Q/) 
> <https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-STDRVQ3Q/%29> as the leadership
> > team of the RDS PDP WG, with the leadership team tasked to organise
> > themselves in the form of chair/vice-chairs or co-chairs.
> >
> > If you have any objections to this approach, please make your
> > objection know on the mailing list by Wednesday 10 February at 18.00
> > UTC as a desire was expressed on the call to move forward with the
> > normal course of business as soon as possible.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Marika
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> > gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160209/50625d72/attachment.html>