[Gnso-ssc] [Ext] Please participate - Evaluation Survey GNSO Candidates for RDS Review Team

Wed Apr 5 12:59:24 UTC 2017

Maxim, the GNSO / SSC has been asked to review the candidates that have requested GNSO endorsement. I’m not sure how this process is facilitated by including all applicants (which, for what it is worth, can be found here: https://community.icann.org/x/gYfDAw), but I may be missing something?

Best regards,

Marika

From: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 at 06:53
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-ssc at icann.org" <gnso-ssc at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ext] [Gnso-ssc] Please participate - Evaluation Survey GNSO Candidates for RDS Review Team

Dear Marika,

I based my questions of XLS file from the page

https://community.icann.org/display/GSSC/RDS+Review+Team[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_GSSC_RDS-2BReview-2BTeam&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=iR9qg-AuKlGoVAdhk6yFsHP9jpxihsJjT1bdO6dB638&s=WxRf4AIAnMjA8tg6Hr0lA-nJcNd67hOLJFRyQ0iFl3c&e=>

and XLS file

called
Staff assessment of applicants expertise

https://community.icann.org/display/GSSC/RDS+Review+Team?preview=/64077801/64079206/RDS-WHOIS2%20Applicants%20Expertise%2024March2017(1).xlsx[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_GSSC_RDS-2BReview-2BTeam-3Fpreview-3D_64077801_64079206_RDS-2DWHOIS2-2520Applicants-2520Expertise-252024March2017-281-29.xlsx&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=iR9qg-AuKlGoVAdhk6yFsHP9jpxihsJjT1bdO6dB638&s=5RkvGL5cmBPMsG7Ohbc1AhcRpaD-J3I3mh8M1Attwow&e=>

I suggest that SSC has resulting sheet containing all applicants (not only those affiliated with GNSO) with columns "Geography" and detailed affiliation / SOIs (if any
 - given that SOI is a prerequisite for participation in PDP WGs, it is important too).

And the voting should be done against the whole list of the applicants (or qualified applicants - if SCC is allowed to do so).

P.s: I had e-mail conversation with RySG/RrSG leadership and James Bladel and as I understood
taking short cuts in the name of expediency is definetely not expected
.  It's more important to get this done correctly, rather than to get it done quickly.

So we might more or less easily request 1Week more if we find that it is required for final deliberations.
(Bigger timeframe - like 1 month could be obtained , but the justification should be done properly )

Sincerely Yours,

Maxim Alzoba
Special projects manager,
International Relations Department,
FAITID

m. +7 916 6761580
skype oldfrogger

Current UTC offset: +3.00 (Moscow)

On Apr 4, 2017, at 18:52, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>> wrote:

Dear Maxim,

Please find below some responses in blue.

Best regards,

Marika

From: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba at gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba at gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 09:28
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Cc: "gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ssc at icann.org>" <gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ssc at icann.org>>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-ssc] Please participate - Evaluation Survey GNSO Candidates for RDS Review Team

Dear Marika,

Please add these notes to the result of the poll:

1. The name of the voting
"Evaluation of GNSO Candidates for RDS Review Team (option 1)"
is incorrect due to not all the following persons being GNSO Candidates,
I suggest we replace it with "Evaluation of applicants who claimed to be with GNSO for RDS Review Team (option 1)"

MK: Candidates were asked by which SO/AC they would like to endorsed. This does not necessarily mean that the candidates have to be a member of a GNSO SG/C – it is up to the GNSO to decide whether or not to endorse a candidate that has requested GNSO support. Those candidates that do obtain endorsement are then considered GNSO candidates for the RDS review team. Does that make sense?

2. The GNSO endorsement should be obtained from the  relevant  SG/C chair (directly, and not via poll  about " personal experience" of SSC group members)  and since the responses of SO/AC leaders are expected to be received by 25th April 2017, we need to take into account that the current voting item 3 (about GNSO endorsement) should be seen as a draft based on non confirmed/not full  information.

We are in the position of not knowing/being able to endorse all people who claim "GNSO" affiliation.

MK: as noted above, endorsement is not necessarily dependent on whether or not a candidate is affiliated with the GNSO. The SSC may want/need to further discuss what is required to obtain GNSO endorsement, in addition to meeting the requirements as set out in the call for volunteers.

3. Also I need underline that single choice of "No / Don't know" for items 2 and 3 does not allow to understand, was it NO or Do not Know.

MK: the responses here were combined for simplicity, but as part of the review of the results, the SSC could discuss whether it was a ‘no’ or ‘don’t know’?

4. The preparation work (Staff assessment of Applicants Expertise) has only four choices  (None/Meets Some/Meets  Most/Meets All) and the methodology of resolution, which level to set for the particular candidate is not presented to SSC so far.

MK: I will follow up with my colleagues who carried out this assessment to see if they can share some further insights.

5. I suggest that the chart is reformatted to create single sheet with three additional columns:
 "Geography",
"AC/SO" with reflection of the part of GNSO person has affiliation to , like GNSO-RrSG/GNSO-RySG...e.t.c.,  and it should be the same GNSO body, which confirms endorsement (just GNSO is too broad, we need to avoid confusion ),
"SOI" with URL to the Statements of Interest (if any).
The reason to do so is to receive a single sheet with applicable filters, which makes it usable.

MK: note that the summary document circulated includes the GNSO affiliation as we have been able to derive from the applications. We hope that SSC members are able to confirm whether the listed affiliations are correct.

6.Name of Remmy Nweke applicant should be corrected (listed in the poll as Rummy Nweke.

MK: done – thank you for pointing this out.

7. For the applicant Subham Charae e-mail subhamcharan at gmail.com<mailto:subhamcharan at gmail.com> included twice, the same for  Stephanie Perrin (one of the records show 50%+ participation and the activity, and the other is not ... which is strange , given the same e-mail used), the same for Emily Taylor (withdrawn application).

MK: I am not sure which document you are referring to?

8. Unfortunately I failed to find, which part of GNSO Vignesh Pamu, Pitinan Kooamornpatana (Fellowship approved for ICANN59, Business ) ,Subham Charan (in application: As of now NO experience, fresher ) are affiliated with.
I suggest we request those applicants to identify, how they joined GNSO, and which part.

MK: I will ask my colleagues who have received these applications to reach out to these individuals to request further information concerning their GNSO affiliation.

9. Also it is not clear, which part of GNSO Erika Mann is affiliated with at the moment.

MK: Erika is a nominating committee appointee to the GNSO Council.

10. Given the short notice it was not possible to receive opinion of my SG, so I suggest that the output of this voting  is used as a draft attempt .

11.All applicants have to be on the same chart for a proper review. We need to ensure qualifications of candidates are best possible from the given pool and then ensure diversity (and not vice versa).

MK: are you suggesting any changes to the poll or summary document? I’m not clear on that.

-----

Also I have few questions , which I think will help us to better understand the situation:

Could you send us the reason for a hurry are all are in?

MK: The GNSO Council has requested that “the SSC to carry out the review and selection of GNSO endorsed candidates for the Registration Directory Service Review Team for Council consideration at the latest by its 20 April 2017 meeting”. The document deadline (by which the motion to confirm the candidates) needs to be submitted is Monday 10 April. So basically in order to meet this deadline the SSC needs to have finalized its selection by coming Monday.

What the deadlines are?

MK: Staff supporting the RDS RT and the application process have requested to receive nominations from the SO/ACs no later than 25 April. The SO/AC Chairs are expected to meet shortly thereafter to confirm the selections.

Who set it?

MK: I believe staff proposed this deadline.

What was the reason to doing so?

MK: the timing of the start of the RDS RT is linked to completion of the previous review team as the cycle for the different reviews is dictated by the ICANN Bylaws.

Sincerely Yours,

Maxim Alzoba
Special projects manager,
International Relations Department,
FAITID

m. +7 916 6761580
skype oldfrogger

Current UTC offset: +3.00 (Moscow)

On Apr 4, 2017, at 02:56, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>> wrote:

Dear All,

The Evaluation Survey for GNSO Candidates for the RDS Review Team is now live: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GNSORDSRT[surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_r_GNSORDSRT&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=iTXBUjFmGbA4LRjJ8FZeyXg7FZl2mY_9PVFD4yxUyac&s=0ezhfqiwjzXFWiexqCQ1VSxwK-xOaUjr-trvCOgyGt4&e=>. Please complete the survey as soon as possible, but at the latest COB Tuesday 4 April so that the results can be aggregated for Wednesday’s SSC meeting. Prior to completing the survey, please make sure to review the candidate applications as well as the call for volunteers which outlines the responsibilities, skills & experience and desired attributes – see https://community.icann.org/x/6b-RAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_6b-2DRAw&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=iTXBUjFmGbA4LRjJ8FZeyXg7FZl2mY_9PVFD4yxUyac&s=PRWKoI1A6O1IvZQ2RBTR7kQXar6LbLjrJ55ed2gm6kU&e=>. As there were no objections, the results, both aggregated as well as well as individual responses, will be shared public. Do take into account the potential sensitivity of individual comments as you fill out the survey.

Best regards,

Marika
Marika Konings
Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=iTXBUjFmGbA4LRjJ8FZeyXg7FZl2mY_9PVFD4yxUyac&s=pOpeph0RrEEyuk3dObzu27IjpQrjbhmsuOPjCErw9qs&e=> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=iTXBUjFmGbA4LRjJ8FZeyXg7FZl2mY_9PVFD4yxUyac&s=u2XK9lvcP5q4IMswbBk0ZwdhFi8-CXwKxCx-SvHukfE&e=>.

_______________________________________________
Gnso-ssc mailing list
Gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ssc at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ssc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ssc/attachments/20170405/e60eef68/attachment-0001.html>