[CWG-Stewardship] Updated draft of responses in PTI Bylaws-AoI table

[Jonathan Robinson]

Thanks Seun. That is what was intended. Jonathan
On 30 Jun 2016 16:50, "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
> On 30 Jun 2016 16:32, "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson at afilias.info> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
> SO: Correct though I would note that it should be construed in such a way
> that would ensure a collective decision of the 2 independent members can
> make such veto happen.
>
> In that sense I would say that only the ICANN appointed board member who
> is elected Chair should not have a vote in the veto process. I think the
> second ICANN board appointee should have a vote. This maintains balance
> across the 2 categories.
>
> Regards
> >
> >
> > 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>; 'Chuck Gomes' <
> cgomes at verisign.com>
> >
> > Cc: 'Lise Fuhr' <lise.fuhr at difo.dk>; 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>
> > Cc: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr at difo.dk>; 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> 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] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 3:07 AM
> >> To: James Gannon
> >> Cc: Lise Fuhr; 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>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Agree with Matt for the record.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -J
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Matthew Shears <
> mshears at cdt.org>
> >> Date: Tuesday 28 June 2016 at 09:34
> >> To: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr at difo.dk>, "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <
> 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> 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> 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> 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 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
> >>
> >> LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: <iotf-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Grace Abuhamad <
> grace.abuhamad at icann.org>
> >> Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 6:49 PM
> >> To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>, "iotf at icann.org" <
> iotf at icann.org>
> >> Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <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 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition?
> >>
> >> LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>
> >> Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 6:35 PM
> >> To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>, "iotf at icann.org" <
> iotf at icann.org>
> >> Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <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] On Behalf
> Of Grace Abuhamad
> >> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 5:16 PM
> >> To: iotf at icann.org
> >> Cc: 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 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Interested in the IANA Stewardship Trans
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160630/4d610e09/attachment-0001.html>