[CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
Gomes, Chuck
cgomes at verisign.com
Thu Jun 30 13:37:06 UTC 2016
Thanks Jonathan & Lise. I like this suggestion.
Chuck
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 9:31 AM
To: jrobinson at afilias.info; 'Seun Ojedeji'; Gomes, Chuck
Cc: 'Lise Fuhr'; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
All,
Given point 1 &4 immediately below, Lise and I were reluctant to re-open this or any other point.
However, having further reflected and discussed this, we can suggest an additional step.
We propose to add a specific question to the PTI Bylaws Public Comment that seeks views on this point.
We can ask for comment as to: whether:
a. the PTI Chair must be selected by the board from the two nom com nominated directors
OR
b. should ideally be selected by the board from the two nom com nominated directors
(unless neither is able to serve in that capacity or if one of the other directors (excluding the President) is best qualified for the role)
Point (a) above ensures complete independence from ICANN but does not guarantee that the board elects the person whom they believe to be best qualified.
Point (b) above ensures full confidence of the board in the chair. N.B. In any event, all directors have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interest of PTI.
Note that in the (b) scenario, the independent directors could effectively veto the chair since the ICANN nominated and appointed chair would (I assume) not have a vote in their own selection.
Thank-you,
Lise & Jonathan
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info]
Sent: 29 June 2016 11:36
To: 'Seun Ojedeji' <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>>; 'Chuck Gomes' <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
Cc: 'Lise Fuhr' <lise.fuhr at difo.dk<mailto:lise.fuhr at difo.dk>>; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
All,
Thank-you for the additional thoughtful input.
Lise and I have met to discuss these points and we feel that there is a delicate balance to manage here, taking account of key issues as follows:
1. This has been thoroughly discussed over a number of meetings (following the five step process outlined on 6 June 2016)
2. Key issues for many in the CWG are the very fine balance between independence of PTI and its legal affiliation to ICANN.
The Nom Com selected appointees are seen by many as not necessarily being more “superior and trustworthy” as such but they are, by definition, independent of ICANN. It is this independence that is a key factor.
3. The opportunity for the CWG to draft specifications to the Nom Com for director qualifications thus ensuring relevant competence (including chair skills) of Nom Com selected nominee directors
4. Our timeline for conclusion (including the plan to publish bylaw documents for public comment imminently)
5. The opportunity for future review (in 2 years)
On the basis of the above, we are proceeding as previously outlined.
Thank-you again,
Lise & Jonathan
From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
Sent: 28 June 2016 20:52
To: Chuck Gomes <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
Cc: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr at difo.dk<mailto:lise.fuhr at difo.dk>>; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
Hi,
I assume it's the board votes that would determine who is more qualified and not any external sources, other than that, my +1 to Chuck's suggested edit.
Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 28 Jun 2016 4:41 p.m., "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>> wrote:
Greg/James,
Are you saying that you believe the chair must be one of the NomCom appointees? If so, what if neither of the non-Nom nominated directors is as qualified as one of the ICANN appointed directors (excluding he PTI President) or if the NomCom nominated directors are not able to commit the extra time needed to be chair? Why limit the possibilities? It seems to me that we would want the best qualified leader to serve as Board chair.
I agree with Seun’s concern but I would be okay with language along this line: “The Board chair should be one of the NomCom appointees unless they are unable to serve in that capacity or if one of the other directors (excluding the President) are more qualified.”
Chuck
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 3:07 AM
To: James Gannon
Cc: Lise Fuhr; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
Agee with Matt and James.
Greg
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 2:42 AM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net<mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
Agree with Matt for the record.
-J
From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org<mailto:mshears at cdt.org>>
Date: Tuesday 28 June 2016 at 09:34
To: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>>
Cc: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr at difo.dk<mailto:lise.fuhr at difo.dk>>, "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
To be clear I don't agree with the proposed change by Seun to 5.4 for the reasons that were fully discussed in the meeting in which we agreed the text.
On Tuesday, 28 June 2016, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs,
May I know if these comments of mine are received and would be implemented as proposed especially as there is no opposition on the suggestions from the list?
Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 27 Jun 2016 01:49, "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello,
Somehow this skipped my raider, while this is already late, i could not come swallow 2 points from the final text.
Section 5.4: I am quite concerned and wonder why we include the following text:
"The Chairperson should be a NomCom nominated director". The board does the selection of chair person, so there is NO reason why ICANN appointed board member cannot be the chairperson if the board wants it. I don't think i dig turning the nomcom nominees into the defacto source of chairperson-hood. It seem to me that we are seeing them as more superior and trustworthy that the rest which is not necessarily always the case. Ofcourse i am with the rest of the response to that question.
Section 7.1: I am concerned by this conclusion "The Corporation will not need additional officers therefore the board does not need this capability." as i think its an unnecessary lock-in and can have unforeseen implications in future. I will be fine with something that reads like below:
"The Corporation should not need additional officers therefore the board may not need this capability. However such may be done with a unanimous votes from board subject to member(s) approval."
Regards
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>> wrote:
Dear all,
Following the CWG-Stewardship call today, here attached are the latest redline and clean versions of the PTI response table to deliver to Sidley. Please review in the next 24h before we consider these final.
Thank you,
Grace
--
Grace Abuhamad
Manager, Public Policy
ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006
Direct: +1 202 249 7545<tel:%2B1%20202%20249%207545> | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638<tel:%2B1%20310%20200%207638>
Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
LEARN MORE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. STAY UPDATED<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status>. FOLLOW<https://twitter.com/icann>. ENGAGE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved>.
From: <iotf-bounces at icann.org<mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 6:49 PM
To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>, "iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>" <iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [IOTF] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
Good catch Chuck. Per your comment and Matthew’s agreement, I was supposed to delete the sentence beginning with “Member approval NOT required….”.
I’ll make the edit in the Google doc and await any further comments before circulating a new version in time for the CWG call.
Thank you,
Grace
--
Grace Abuhamad
Manager, Public Policy
ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006
Direct: +1 202 249 7545<tel:%2B1%20202%20249%207545> | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638<tel:%2B1%20310%20200%207638>
Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
LEARN MORE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. STAY UPDATED<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status>. FOLLOW<https://twitter.com/icann>. ENGAGE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved>.
From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 6:35 PM
To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>, "iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>" <iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: RE: Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
The edits look good to me. Was the second option in Section 7.6.1 supposed to be deleted?
“Board may approve delegation of responsibilities or powers of President.
Member approval NOT required for the prescription of additional duties by the board to the President.[1] [2]
Member approval required for the prescription of additional powers by the board to the President.”
Chuck
From: iotf-bounces at icann.org<mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 5:16 PM
To: iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: [IOTF] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table
Dear all,
Per the discussion on today’s IOTF call, here attached is a redline version of the edits discussed on the call and a clean version to present to the CWG-Stewardship on Thursday. Thank you for your patience in the live editing process!
--Grace
--
Grace Abuhamad
Manager, Public Policy
ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006
Direct: +1 202 249 7545<tel:%2B1%20202%20249%207545> | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638<tel:%2B1%20310%20200%207638>
Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
LEARN MORE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. STAY UPDATED<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status>. FOLLOW<https://twitter.com/icann>. ENGAGE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved>.
From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
Date: Monday, June 13, 2016 at 4:47 PM
To: <iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: Reminder: Please review the responses in PTI Bylaws table
Dear all,
In absence of the IOTF call today, I would just like to remind you to take some time to review the Google doc table of CWG responses on the PTI Bylaws. There are some notes and live edits made during the last IOTF call, and some comments from Chuck and Avri. The link to the document is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rmsp569qRxkWtNSNrJsZzENxFKLwbXVcTDWSGZJEqcU/edit?usp=sharing.
I think (but will let the Chairs confirm) that the plan is still to have CWG-Stewardship sign-off in time (or during) the CWG-Stewardship meeting on Thursday 16 June. Following group sign-off, the Client Committee would then be able to share the responses with Sidley for incorporation into the PTI Bylaws.
Thank you,
Grace
--
Grace Abuhamad
Manager, Public Policy
ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006
Direct: +1 202 249 7545<tel:%2B1%20202%20249%207545> | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638<tel:%2B1%20310%20200%207638>
Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
LEARN MORE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. STAY UPDATED<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status>. FOLLOW<https://twitter.com/icann>. ENGAGE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved>.
From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
Date: Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 6:00 PM
To: <iotf at icann.org<mailto:iotf at icann.org>>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: Process for IANA Bylaws - CWG Questions & Issues from Sidley
Dear all,
Per the email below, steps 1 & 2 have been completed: the CWG-Stewardship Chairs have provided initial responses, and the staff have matched these responses to the transcript of the CWG-Stewardship meeting from last week. The initial responses are available in a Google doc for the IOTF’s comments at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rmsp569qRxkWtNSNrJsZzENxFKLwbXVcTDWSGZJEqcU/edit?usp=sharing.
Please note that the CWG-Stewardship list is copied for information. Anyone on either of these lists should feel free to review and comment on the initial responses, but the responsibility lies primarily with the IOTF at this stage.
I will let the Chairs clarify the timeline for review, but my understanding is that we would like to have CWG-Stewardship sign-off in time (or during) the CWG-Stewardship meeting on Thursday 16 June. Following group sign-off, the Client Committee would then be able to share the responses with Sidley for incorporation into the PTI Bylaws.
Thank you,
Grace
--
Grace Abuhamad
Manager, Public Policy
ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006
Direct: +1 202 249 7545<tel:%2B1%20202%20249%207545> | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638<tel:%2B1%20310%20200%207638>
Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
LEARN MORE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. STAY UPDATED<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status>. FOLLOW<https://twitter.com/icann>. ENGAGE<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved>.
From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>>
Organization: Afilias
Reply-To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>>
Date: Monday, June 6, 2016 at 4:04 AM
To: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Process for IANA Bylaws - CWG Questions & Issues from Sidley
All,
The substance and process for dealing with CWG Bylaws was discussed this on last week’s CWG call and then followed up by Lise & myself.
Based on the discussions within the CWG, we propose the following course of action in order to get through the work as efficiently as possible.
1. Chairs will make a first attempt at answering / providing relevant input on the Sidley questions
2. Staff will review chairs’ input for consistency with the CWG meeting discussions
3. Answers / input to be shared with IOTF group for further review / development
4. Answers / input to be shared with CWG for further review / development
5. Answers / input to be shared via Client Committee with Sidley for incorporation into IANA Bylaws
Thank-you
Lise & Jonathan
________________________________
I lean toward this approach. It seems to me that the PTI Board should have this authority on its own; also, it would cause delays if they had to wait to get ICANN approval, causing unnecessary delays.
for so long as such powers were strictly limited according to the PTI mission/role etc.
_______________________________________________
IOTF mailing list
IOTF at icann.org<mailto:IOTF at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seun Ojedeji,
Federal University Oye-Ekiti
web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
Mobile: +2348035233535<tel:%2B2348035233535>
alt email:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng<mailto:email%3Aseun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
_______________________________________________
IOTF mailing list
IOTF at icann.org<mailto:IOTF at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160630/130e4c59/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the CWG-Stewardship
mailing list