[council] [EXTERNAL] Re: fellowship questionnaire response
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Fri Apr 6 21:36:04 UTC 2018
Yes my apologies it was sloppily worded...it is a fact, but we know it
not because we measured it, but anecdotally. Not all anecdotes are fake
news (sorry I could not resist):-)
I would be happy to meet with the fellowship team and discuss, I agree
that it is far from comfortable casting stones from afar. We are trying
to help improve things.
Stephanie
On 2018-04-06 12:40, Austin, Donna wrote:
>
> Hi Marie, I believe you are correct that it is indeed a fact.
>
> I also fully support Stephanie’s suggest edits. Stephanie also raises
> some really good points about attracting people with specific skills,
> I certainly agree that a couple of retired judges could be an
> interesting addition to the ICANN mix. Over time the NomCom has come
> to understand that Board members not only need to know about ICANN,
> but that the Board would be well-served by people with specific
> expertise not dissimilar from some that Stephanie suggests for the
> Fellowship program. I think it makes perfect sense to rethink the
> program and target specific expertise.
>
> Given the considerable discussion this topic has generated on the
> Council list, I wonder if it would make sense for a small group of
> council volunteers with an interest in this topic to offer to meet
> with Sally, Siranush and Deborah to cover some of our concerns and see
> how we can assist in reshaping the program/s—as I believe that is part
> of the intent of this survey. I think there would be more value in
> doing this than just responding to the survey and casting stones from
> afar. I’d be willing to be part of this effort.
>
> Thanks again to Rafik for working through the myriad of different
> opinions to come up with a good Council response.
>
> Donna
>
> *From:*council [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Marie Pattullo
> *Sent:* Friday, April 06, 2018 4:06 AM
> *To:* Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>;
> council at gnso.icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [council] [EXTERNAL] Re: fellowship questionnaire response
>
> Thanks to all for the work on this; one small point under Q2 – “We
> note, based on anecdotal evidence, that for example, the GNSO council
> currently has two members who benefitted from the fellowship
> program...” – it’s not anecdotal, it’s a fact – no?
>
> Best
>
> Marie
>
> *From:*council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>> *On Behalf Of *Stephanie Perrin
> *Sent:* Friday, April 6, 2018 9:15 AM
> *To:* council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [council] [EXTERNAL] Re: fellowship questionnaire response
>
> I apologize for offering so many edits at this point in the process, I
> started out intending to merely fix a couple of gramaticals but was
> struck with our fundamental problem here: the need to be positive, as
> Donna pointed out, yet insist on some critical thinking and analysis
> about the program, as Ayden has stressed on a number of occasions. We
> agree we need metrics; I think we might wish to sharpen up the actual
> goals of the program as well but there is not a question there which
> really offers that opportunity to comment. Regular audits and program
> review seem to be required in my view, but it seemed a bit severe to
> say that.
>
> I was struck by the absence of fellows in the working group meetings
> which I participated in in Puerto Rico. It seems that the fellows are
> meeting in separate rooms, away from the main stream of activity.
> This strikes me as odd. We should encourage greater immersion in our
> activities in my view, and provide mentorship. I have also proposed
> to Chris Mondini and his team that we really need a "Zoomer" stream in
> our outreach efforts (referring to a Canadian seniors magazine and
> range of activities targeted at active retirees) to attract folks with
> time available, and deeper experience that might be useful at ICANN
> (e.g. accounting, ethics, program review, conflict resolution,
> foundation work (think auction proceeds not concrete) etc.). It is
> great to get young people but a couple of retired judges might be
> really handy too.....:-)
>
> Stephanie Perrin
>
> On 2018-04-06 01:52, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
> Hi Donna,
>
> Thanks for the comments. I added the 2 suggestions to the attached
> document.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2018-04-06 14:41 GMT+09:00 Austin, Donna
> <Donna.Austin at team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin at team.neustar>>:
>
> Hi Rafik
>
> I agree with your first suggestion.
>
> On Q16, could we keep the response as simple as: “Some members
> of Council have a good understanding of the differences, while
> others do not."
>
> Thanks
>
> Donna
>
> *From:*council [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Rafik
> Dammak
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 05, 2018 10:02 PM
> *To:* Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>
> *Cc:* Council GNSO <council at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] fellowship questionnaire
> response
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the comments and input
>
> for the first suggestion, I think we can keep it simple as
> suggested under Q #2:"For example, the GNSO council currently
> has two members who benefitted from the fellowship program,
> while we are not inferring any causation"
> that is factual and neutral and doesn't embed any judgment.
>
> For Q #16, I don't see there is support for the options
> available and taking into account the proposals:
> "Council believes there is a risk of potential overlap between
> the 2 programs. We would like to seek clarification regarding
> the number of recipients who benefited from both programs to
> be used as a metric to monitor the overlap and avoid it."
>
> to highlight that need more info about this overlap and
> indicating that should be avoided.
>
> hope those are acceptable.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2018-04-06 6:35 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>
> In principle I have no objection to the Council noting
> that two current Councillors are fellowship alumni,
> however I do not want us to over-inflate the value of the
> fellowship programme. Is it an anomaly or fluke that two
> fellowship alumni are currently Councillors, has this been
> a typical trend for several years now, or is this simply a
> sign of the maturity of the programme that with the
> passage of time participants are going on into more and
> more leadership positions? I don't know the answer to this
> - and if no one on the list does either, perhaps we should
> condition our statement by noting that correlation does
> not necessarily imply causation... Simply being a
> Councillor does not, in my opinion, necessarily provide
> evidence for the success of the fellowship programme.
> There are all different kinds of Councillors; some provide
> more valuable inputs than others, and for the fellowship
> programme to be held up as some kind of success story, we
> need a way of measuring the performance of our Councillors
> so that we can compare those who have been fellows with
> those who have entered ICANN through other avenues. Of
> course we should not go down that rabbit hole in this
> comment; but all the same, I do not want us to oversell
> the outcomes of the fellowship programme. Thank you.
>
> Regarding question 16, I have observed a disturbing
> trend whereby one participates in the NextGen programme,
> then serves subsequently as a NextGen ambassador, and then
> becomes a fellow three times, a fellow coach another three
> times (yes, fellows coach themselves), then a senior
> fellow coach three times, and in theory, they could then
> become a booth lead. I say 'in theory' because while I am
> aware of fellows who have exhausted that programme, been
> coaches and senior coaches, and gone on to become booth
> leads, I do not know of any NextGen alumni who have done
> this. But I think it would be possible. The NextGen and
> fellowship programmes are meant to be separate and
> distinct. I find it very problematic that there is an
> overlap of participants between the two tracks, and so I
> do wonder if they could be amalgamated into the one programme.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden Férdeline
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>
> On 5 April 2018 4:55 PM, <philippe.fouquart at orange.com
> <mailto:philippe.fouquart at orange.com>> wrote:
>
> Agree, (it’s useful to be sometimes.); the text makes
> some good points in that respect.
>
> Regards,
>
> Philippe
>
> *From:*Michele Neylon - Blacknight
> [mailto:michele at blacknight.com
> <mailto:michele at blacknight.com>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 05, 2018 4:43 PM
> *To:* FOUQUART Philippe IMT/OLN; Council GNSO
> *Subject:* Re: [council] fellowship questionnaire response
>
> One of the key issues with this entire thing is the
> overall lack of metrics
>
> (Sorry if I’m repetitive)
>
> Regards
>
> Michele
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> *Error! Filename not specified.*Image removed by
> sender.https://www.blacknight.com/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.blacknight.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=8gJQlzAPAhkcL518alKZXHywAubkjv_OgRztZYlA1JQ&s=Y9Efv_X0Ej3toiL2l1R6iUq5zw_dCa58GJKBM5N6iCo&e=>
>
> *Error! Filename not specified.*Image removed by
> sender.http://blacknight.blog/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__blacknight.blog_&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=8gJQlzAPAhkcL518alKZXHywAubkjv_OgRztZYlA1JQ&s=842ACTjLnRmh9ootjRbim0BqyDTgfslKkDcrxKFUTOw&e=>
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> Personal blog: *Error! Filename not specified.*Image
> removed by sender.https://michele.blog/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__michele.blog_&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=8gJQlzAPAhkcL518alKZXHywAubkjv_OgRztZYlA1JQ&s=50nmZFewtzFh6ld12Myy8c9-QRRtuaBTjMg4ZrgkQfY&e=>
>
> Some thoughts: *Error! Filename not specified.*Image
> removed by sender.https://ceo.hosting/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ceo.hosting_&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=8gJQlzAPAhkcL518alKZXHywAubkjv_OgRztZYlA1JQ&s=KQQBlfDLfdPFKfMyNvUB29tWrqrEBwz_4dZ9ICCIrDk&e=>
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside
> Business Park,Sleaty
>
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company
> No.: 370845
>
> *From: *council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of
> "philippe.fouquart at orange.com
> <mailto:philippe.fouquart at orange.com>"
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com
> <mailto:philippe.fouquart at orange.com>>
> *Date: *Thursday 5 April 2018 at 15:40
> *To: *Council GNSO <council at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> *Subject: *Re: [council] fellowship questionnaire response
>
> Colleagues,
>
> Thanks very much to the editing team, I think this is
> a balanced and most helpful input to the
> “consultation”. As an aside, I noted during our San
> Juan meeting that the ISPCP developed an answer and
> it’s quite consistent with what we have here.
>
> I have two comments.
>
> 1. I also think we should include Donna’s comment re.
> Council having fellowship alumni in its
> current/past membership. GNSO constituencies are
> likely to note this in their response; it would be
> odd for Council itself not to. Maybe under
> Question 2. just say something factual like “For
> example, the GNSO council currently has two
> members who benefitted from the fellowship
> program”. (side comment: 4 has “While there has
> been some evidence of former fellows becoming GNSO
> Councillors”, I’m not sure about the “evidence”:
> either they have been councilors or they haven’t,
> but maybe that’s just my English…:)
>
> 2. Regarding Question #16, if my reading of the
> criteria is correct, the potential overlap between
> fellowship and NextGen at ICANN is the extent to
> which Fellowship is granted to under 30
> under/postgrad/PhD students (who may/should fall
> under NextGen at ICANN).
>
> * If that number is zero then there can be no
> overlap, the two things serve separate audiences
> (maybe there’s a discussion to have as to whether
> the audience is relevant to ICANN’s work but that
> wasn’t the question),
> * if that number is high however, the potential
> overlap is significant, given that the expected
> inputs from those two groups of participants may
> indeed overlap according to the programs.
>
> I haven’t got the figures in that respect and maybe
> seeking clarification as to the number of fellowship
> recipients who might have qualified for nextgen would
> be useful or something to point out as a “metric” to
> monitor moving forward.
>
> Regards,
>
> Philippe
>
> *From:*council [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Rafik Dammak
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 05, 2018 4:33 AM
> *To:* Austin, Donna
> *Cc:* Council GNSO
> *Subject:* Re: [council] [EXTERNAL] fellowship
> questionnaire response
>
> Hi Donna,
>
> Thanks for the comment, I think we can add that
> acknowledgment if you have a text ready.
>
> we still have the Question #16 to resolve with the 2
> options available.
>
> as a reminder, I think the deadline for submitting is
> Friday 6th April.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2018-04-03 9:32 GMT+09:00 Austin, Donna
> <Donna.Austin at team.neustar
> <mailto:Donna.Austin at team.neustar>>:
>
> Thanks Rafik and the small team who worked on this
> response for the Council.
>
> I appreciate the narrow focus on PDPs because that is
> area of responsibility for the council and the need
> for meaningful metrics; however, I think it might also
> be helpful to acknowledge that the Council has been
> well-served by the Fellowship Program by way of a
> number of our Councilors coming to us via the program,
> for example our current councilors, Martin and Arsene.
> I don’t see any downside to acknowledging the value of
> the program from this perspective.
>
> Donna
>
> *From:*council [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>] *On Behalf Of
> *Rafik Dammak
> *Sent:* Monday, April 02, 2018 4:27 PM
> *To:* Council GNSO <council at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [council] fellowship
> questionnaire response
>
> Hi all,
>
> Please find attached the latest version of the draft
> response to the fellowship questionnaire. It went
> through several revisions based on previous
> council comments and discussion within the small team.
> We are looking forward your input regarding the
> overall draft to be endorsed as council comment and
> making changes as needed.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des
> informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne
> doivent donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans
> autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur,
> veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces
> jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles
> d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a
> ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain
> confidential or privileged information that may be
> protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without
> authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please
> notify the sender and delete this message and its
> attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for
> messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
>
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
> Image removed by
> sender.https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_council&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=8gJQlzAPAhkcL518alKZXHywAubkjv_OgRztZYlA1JQ&s=-HpXf4QOxTxJFgfZUHyxZtftxz4APIbo1NOmnkYErow&e=>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> council mailing list
>
> council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_council&d=DwMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=7URtvC2DWFvW4bHXHogEaLqX84yLAkfU2SSqE9thW3w&s=0e5AzReFEv8yqbzZTclZpPJMNjF2YXTgvu9eLqit62Q&e=>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20180406/a20de014/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20180406/a20de014/image001-0001.jpg>
More information about the council
mailing list