<html>
<body>
I enter this discussion with some trepidation, but I have no
choice.<br><br>
Before I start, I will point out that I have no interest in a leadership
role in this WG - my plate is quite full already.<br><br>
I served as a ALAC Liaison to the GNSO for EIGHT years. I believe I hold
the record for service on the GNSO in ANY role, other than that held by
Glen de Saint Géry (Marika will top me in a few months).<br><br>
At my first meeting as a novice to ICANN, I was somewhat amazed to find
that the then-current ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, Bret Fausett, was one of
the GNSO presenters in a public session. Somehow it surprised me that
they would let a "foreigner" speak on their behalf. <br><br>
I was appointed as the ALAC Liaison at the end of that meeting, and I
quickly learned not to be surprised. With very few exceptions over the
eight years, I felt welcomed and fairly treated by the GNSO as a group
and by the vast majority of Councillors individually. Along the way I
played key roles in a very large number of PDP and other WGs, including
Chairing a PDP WG.<br><br>
I totally agree with those who say that the leaders of this new group
should not be newbies and need a good history in ICANN and the GNSO and
GNSO WGs. To the extent possible (and it is not always possible), WG
leaders should not be espousing the positions of their constituency. Yes,
understanding the various positions is important, but that is not
necessarily a characteristic of someone who is themselves a
"believer".<br><br>
I will have no problem if the leaders of this WG end up being from GNSO
groups, but the message being sent that the GNSO cannot accept having
outsiders lead one of their WGs is counter to what I understood about the
GNSO in my eight years, and is counter to where I think that the GNSO
should be going. Now is NOT the time to become more insular and
suspicious of anyone who does not bear an insider logo on their
T-shirt.<br><br>
I will also note that people move around in their ICANN life. When I
started, Bret Fausett, as I mentioned, was with At-Large, as he was for
ten years according to his ICANNWiki entry), Avri Dora was a NomCom
appointee, and soon after became Council Chair (the ONLY GNSO Chair who
was not a member of a Contracted Party), Stephane Van Gelder was a
Registrar, Roberto Gaetano, was ALAC Liaison to the Board, later Board
member and Vice-Chair and later he co-chaired a GNSO PDP! And Liz
Williams was an ICANN staff member working with the GNSO and Donna Austin
was also an ICANN staff member. Where you are today says little of their
past history or experience.<br><br>
I must thank Liz who is the only "GNSO" person I can recall who
objected, and I support what she said.<br><br>
I find this entire conversation very sad.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
<br><br>
At 04/02/2016 09:55 AM, Stephanie Perrin wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I cannot speak for James, but I
will repeat that I do object to ICANN volunteers from other SGs playing a
leadership role, even wonderful contenders such as Holly! Given the
somewhat tumultuous discussions that have gone on at the CCWG over the
past year, it seems to me prudent that the GNSO lead its own
processes. Furthermore, the WHOIS debates over the past 15 years
have amply demonstrated the different economic and policy interests in
the data, and these interests tend to be sharply divided along
stakeholder groups. Ensuring a balance of those stakeholder groups
on the leadership team from the get-go will help diminish perceptions of
unfairness and lack of trust.<br>
<br>
That in no way diminishes the important role and contributions of
volunteers to this committee, and I would stress that there are likely to
be be working groups established in this (doubtless multi-year effort)
where people can contribute in a leader role. However, this is
undoubtedly going to be a fractious process and I think it is reasonable
to look for previous participation at ICANN, not necessarily leadership
of a pdp per se, but demonstrated ability to remain neutral, understand
procedure, and support staff who are going to be doing a great deal of
work for us. With great respect to all volunteers, I don't think
this is a role for those who have not recently participated in at least
some kind of working group at ICANN. It is very important that we
have a broad range of expertise and talent represented here, but let us
be clear about the various roles we all will be playing. <br>
My original point, which James clarified far better than I had originally
expressed it, is that volunteers who are not used to ICANN and its
processes will not understand any of the political questions embedded in
the poll, meaning no disrespect to staff who created that poll.<br><br>
If I may reiterate the point that Michele made, many of the SOIs of
people who have volunteered for this work need serious editing and
clarification. If staff could review the list and reach out to
those in question it would be appreciated. Our membership list for
NCUC is public, non-members are welcome to apply.<br>
And if I may respond to a point that Dr. Williams made: "I would
suggest that we leave it to the leadership group to decide who “leads”
it…all of us are capable of leading"<br>
1. We are discussing the process of how to select that leadership
group at the moment, once that group is determined, how they spell one
another off is of course up to them with group concensus, providing
procedures are duly followed (and I for one depend on Marika to remind us
of procedures on a regular basis)<br>
2. With great respect, we are not all equal in our leadership
ability and experience. This is why several of us are insisting on
demonstrated ability to perform a neutral, balanced role in an ICANN
setting. I think it is quite challenging. For those who are
new to ICANN, following this group for a year or so every week will give
you a rich and varied experience which will doubtless be useful in future
efforts. <br>
I am sorry to go on at such length, but I wanted to dispel any impression
I had given that I was intending this to be an insider process....far
from it, I am very keen on recruiting (for instance) some individuals who
have knowledge of data protection and human rights law who have rarely in
the past participated at ICANN, resulting in unfortunate policies that
violate national law. However, such new individuals/volunteers with
varied expertise are, regardless of past leadership roles, perhaps not
the best choices for the leadership team. I speak as a newbie with
only 3 years of working experience at ICANN, who has now participated in
at least 6 working groups. Doing a good job here, in my view,
requires a lot of learning and bandwidth.<br>
Kind regards, <br>
Stephanie Perrin<br>
On 2016-02-04 6:07, Holly Raiche wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Point of clarification James
<br><br>
I think we all put our hands together when Chuck put his hand up.
He is the obvious Chair of this PDP from my perspective (and, I believe,
a large number of hoers) - with his own stated qualification that it is
for Phase one. But we also all agreed that he would need help -
Vice-chairs. Are you objecting to other ICANN folk (or others with
loads of ICANN experience) in those positions as well?<br><br>
Holly<br>
On 4 Feb 2016, at 6:25 pm, James Gannon
<<a href="mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net">james@cyberinvasion.net</a>
> wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Hi Holly,<br>
Yes apologies for the typo and yes as I said later in the post I do
object to GNSO PDPs being led by non-GNSO members. This is my own
personal opinion but given the current discussions I thought I should be
clear in my position.<br><br>
-jg<br><br>
Sent from my iPad<br><br>
On 4 Feb 2016, at 06:59, Holly Raiche
<<a href="mailto:h.raiche@internode.on.net">
h.raiche@internode.on.net</a>> wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Hi James <br><br>
Just a question about your first sentence - probably caused by what I
think is a misspelling of ‘linking’. Are you seriously objecting to
leadership roles for people who are not members of the GNSO?<br><br>
Just checking<br><br>
Holly<br>
On 4 Feb 2016, at 5:15 pm, James Gannon
<<a href="mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net">james@cyberinvasion.net</a>
> wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I agree with your point in
principle Sana, but in reality I think a couple of us are concerned that
the poll is being used for some strange questions that are more political
in nature such as the question on leadership inkling people from outside
of the GNSO. The results of this first poll will be used to determine
eligibility for leadership positions based on a set of criteria that will
be formed from the poll. <br><br>
Given the extremely complex political aspects of WHOIS and its
interrelations with so many areas of the community it may be extremely
difficult for a newcomer to the entire PDP process and in particular to
WHOIS/RDS to make a fully educated decision on some of the questions
posed. So its not so much that experience and understanding of the
landscape is necessary to be polled, but that to make a fully informed
decision will take longer than the 2 weeks that the PDP has been running
so far.<br><br>
Take for example the issues that some of us have noticed with peoples
SOI’s, there are people wit incorrect information and affiliations,
people claiming to be part of constituencies that they are not and people
listing themselves as independent when they are known to have
affiliations and sometimes business relationships with parties with
commercial and legal interests at stake in the RDS discussions, until we
get the basics such as these things correct its hard to take an informed
decision on the need or want to take an independent member of the working
group into a leadership role that is not GNSO affiliated. <br><br>
Also there is a principle involved here, I firmly and strongly believe
that the GNSO operates its membership in an open and inclusive manner,
where almost everyone can find a home for themselves if they wish to
participate in the policy development process. And even if one feels the
need to be independent we offer open membership to non-affiliated persons
and they are considered fully during all dissuasions and decision making
efforts. However at the core of the PDP is the fact that it is the GNSOs
mission to create gTLD policy through its PDP, and that that role sits
firmly with the GNSO not with the other ACs and Sos.<br><br>
I am likely going to open myself up to some backlash here but I am of the
opinion that we cannot allow GNSO policy development to be led by other
parts of the ICANN ecosphere, the role of the GNSO is diluted when we do
so and results in a GNSO that is not performing the self-control that it
needs to do in order to fulfil its own mission. In particular when it
comes to AC’s participating in leadership roles on a PDP like this I feel
that it in some way violates the system of checks and balances that ICANN
is formed on, AC’s such as ALAC an the GAC have the opportunity to
provide advice to the board when the results of GNSO PDPs come for
consideration by the ICANN board, to wish to lead those same PDPs I feel
takes two bites from the apple, and given that ALAC and At-Large members
are free to participate in the policy development process as decisional
members I think that adding leadership roles to that dynamic complicates
things massively.<br><br>
Bit of a wall of text but <br>
TL;DR: Its the GNSOs role in ICANN to produce policy for gTLDs therefore
this needs to be a GNSO led process with open and collaborative
membership.<br><br>
-jg<br><br>
From:
<<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">
gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Sana Ali
<<a href="mailto:sana.ali2030@gmail.com">sana.ali2030@gmail.com</a>
><br>
Date: Thursday 4 February 2016 at 1:33 a.m.<br>
To: Jennifer Gore Standiford
<<a href="mailto:JStandiford@web.com">JStandiford@web.com</a>><br>
Cc:
"<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>"
<<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Please participate - poll on RDS PDP WG
leadership team characteristics<br><br>
Dear Stephanie, <br><br>
I’ll respectfully disagree with you here.<br><br>
Experience should certainly be a matter of importance when determining
who should be in leadership roles, but to suggest it should also be
required for something as simple as voting on who should be in those
roles, based on pretty straightforward and comprehensible principles, I
find a bit dangerous. It inhibits participation based on…prior
participation, which can become a slippery slope.<br><br>
And from following the discussion, as a newcomer, I have at least picked
up on the fact that even more experienced members of this group seem in
no way unanimous on what should be the key characteristics of the
team.<br><br>
My two cents (with full disclosure that these are indeed rather
newly-minted pennies)<br>
Sana Ali<br><br>
<a href="mailto:sana.ali2030@gmail.com">sana.ali2030@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="https://ca.linkedin.com/in/sanaali2030" eudora="autourl">
https://ca.linkedin.com/in/sanaali2030</a><br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Feb 3, 2016, at 8:00 PM,
Jennifer Gore Standiford
<<a href="mailto:JStandiford@web.com">JStandiford@web.com</a>>
wrote:<br><br>
Agreed. +1<br><br>
On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Stephanie Perrin
<<a href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca">
stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca</a>> wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">There is a fundamental problem
here, in my view. There are a great many members of the group who
are not accustomed to ICANN and its SGs. We are therefore asking
them to vote on something with which they have no/little
experience. Not sure it is going to prove to be a useful
survey.<br>
Stephanie Perrin<br><br>
On 2016-02-02 15:42, Marika Konings wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Dear All,<br><br>
As discussed, staff has created a poll to solicit the WG’s input on the
key characteristics of the RDS PDP WG Leadership Team which we hope will
help inform the the WG’s deliberations on this topic during next week’s
meeting. This poll will be followed by a second poll later this week
which will allow WG members to indicate which candidates they would like
to endorse for the leadership team. To participate in the poll, please go
to
<a href="https://s.zoomerang.com/r/RDSPDPWGleadership">
https://s.zoomerang.com/r/RDSPDPWGleadership</a>. If you have
difficulties accessing this page and/or completing the poll, please
contact me off-list.<br><br>
Please note that this poll is for WG members only. If you are an observer
and want to become a member of the WG, please contact the GNSO
secretariat at
<a href="mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org">gnso-secs@icann.org</a>.<br><br>
Best regards,<br><br>
Marika<br><br>
<br><br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</pre>
</blockquote><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></blockquote><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></blockquote>
</blockquote></blockquote><br><br>
<br><br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></pre>
</blockquote><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></blockquote>
</body>
</html>