[council] NCA Assignments

[William Drake]

Hi again,

On Oct 8, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> What is the NCSG position?

I can only speak for NCUC.  I raised the issue the other day among our  
leadership and we only had responses from two of the nine people  
(councilors plus newly elected Exec. Comm), and they had somewhat  
different perspectives, so there was nothing that could be called a  
consensus position.  At the same time, as of yesterday morning when I  
got a message from Kristina indicating CSG support and asking for our  
view, I'd not seen any discussion on the list with other SGs  
expressing a preference.  So it seemed unlikely there was time to go  
back to our people spread around the world in different time zones,  
arrive at a clear position, and then engage other SGs on the list and  
get consensus before the random selection was to kick in.

> Are you opposed to seating Andrei in the
> Non-Contracted Party House?

?? Last I heard the NCAs had suggested

>
> Contracted Parties House - Andrey
> Non contracted Parties House - Terry
> Independent non-voting - Olga
> If so, please say so even if it is just
> from the NCUC.  I happened to talk to RrSG ExCom members and am  
> aware of
> their position but I will let them communicate that.

Would be good to hear.  But we'd agreed an approach and Avri followed  
it, so on process grounds this discussion is a bit puzzling.

Best,


Bill
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:00 AM
>> To: Gomes, Chuck
>> Cc: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
>> Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
>>
>> Hi Chuck,
>>
>> On Oct 8, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I do not believe your assessment is correct Avri.  My
>> understanding is
>>> that Kristina communicated that the CSG supported seating
>> Terry in the
>>> Non-Contracted Party House but I will let her speak for herself.
>>> Regarding the RySG, I sent an email supporting that as well.
>>
>> Like I guess Avri I must have missed your message, when did
>> you send it?
>>
>> Either way, how would two of four SGs be sufficient?
>>
>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org
>>>> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:26 AM
>>>> To: Council GNSO
>>>> Subject: Re: [council] NCA Assignments
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Because the motion the council passed required that the 4 SG in
>>>> consensus through their reps either agree to the NCA
>> recommendations
>>>> or come up with another plan.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can tell only the CSG agreed with the NCA
>> recommendations
>>>> and there was no consensus on another plan by
>>>> 7 Oct, hence we fall through to the random selection.
>>>>
>>>> a.
>>>>
>>>> On 8 Oct 2009, at 10:11, Philip Sheppard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Avri,
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe a preference has been expressed for Terry and the
>>>> NCP House.
>>>>> Why is this being ignored ?
>>>>> Philip
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>