[council] Review of the GNSO job description for NomCom

Flip Petillion fpetillion at petillion.law
Mon Oct 25 09:44:47 UTC 2021


IPC is still puzzled with regard to item No.5 on the next Council agenda.

1. Procedurally, the IPC fails to understand the reason, yet alone the grounds, for moving the way you propose regarding Agenda item No. 5.

As you stated yourself, there is no urgency. This item was not put on the agenda for discussion during a Council meeting, which is the usual way we handle items before proceeding to a vote and would allow all of us to take comments from colleagues from Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies back to our own Constituency for a final determination before it is shared during a next Council meeting.

Agenda item No. 5 mentions that ‘the Council is considering revising the job description’. That is inaccurate. There is a motion which is proposed for discussion.

Finally, the phrase ‘GNSO Council will vote to approve… ’ is at least premature. Again, there is a motion for discussion, followed by a vote at a later stage.

There are reasons to applaud dynamic leadership and efficient agenda management, but not at the expense of an open dialogue. We are confident you had no intention to stifle the debate and that you will agree to discuss this during our next meeting rather than force a premature vote on a motion that originated with Council leadership; the second part of our meeting may be even more appropriate, given the broader relevance of how Council agendas should, or are expected to, be managed.

2. On the substance, the approach in the motion is debatable, at least. The section ‘The Council is considering the job description to reflect a preference for appointees that are not currently affiliated with any Stakeholder Group or Constituency’ is a personal ambition that is contemplated in the draft motion. It is not a consideration of the Council until it becomes the subject of an in-depth discussion. The text of the agenda item seems to be putting the cart before the horse.

Attached is a marked-up version for discussion as prepared by the IPC.

As you know, I will not be able to attend the Council meeting of 27 October. I hope to see all current and new Councilors at our November meeting.

Have a good meeting.


Flip Petillion
fpetillion at petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion at petillion.law>

[id:image001.png at 01D3691D.DA7539C0]<https://www.petillion.law/>

  Attorneys – Advocaten – Avocats

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20211025/ca0d6b28/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7395 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20211025/ca0d6b28/image001-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: nomcom-position-13sep21-en  revised[3][1][1].docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 44152 bytes
Desc: nomcom-position-13sep21-en  revised[3][1][1].docx
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20211025/ca0d6b28/nomcom-position-13sep21-enrevised311-0001.docx>

More information about the council mailing list