[WP1] Review teams was Re: [] WP1 Work to Do ...

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Mon Jul 6 05:19:25 UTC 2015


I think that is starting to get just a bit closer to something that 
could work. Although 3 from an AC/SO might be allowed, I would think 
it should be a rare exception rather than the norm, with 2 being 
closer to a realistic number.

I will re-iterate that a history of committed work (and 
open-mindedness) is perhaps the most valuable asset to these reviews.

Alan


>On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Avri Doria 
><<mailto:avri at acm.org>avri at acm.org> wrote:
>...
>This brings up another issue.  At the moment we have a flat selector
>mechanism, the ACSO pick them and that is it.  While we have decided
>that it should be the ACSO themselves that pick the members, we have
>lost the balancing ability that selectors such as the Board and GAC
>chair or CEO had.  Perhaps we should have a formula in which each ACSO
>can present 5, 7 or even more candidates from which the combined ACSO
>Chairs  would pick 21, with no more than 3 from each ACSO.
>
>avri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150706/dc73f7d8/attachment.html>


More information about the WP1 mailing list