[NPOC-EC] URGENT - Time sensitive What is your view on on the question of rebalancing the Nominating Committee (NomCom)

[Raoul Plommer]

Here's a draft I made from the NCSG's document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rT2atcp7hQS5jNEH-V6E23ACbr3oGkpgzdB3Uifxtv4/edit?usp=sharing

Please comment on it and I'll send it before 24UTC tomorrow.

-Raoul

On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 11:42, Raoul Plommer <plommer at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello NPOC EC,
>
> According to Julf, We need to write up our own response to the letter from
> April about the NomCom change.
>
> There are the questions:
>
> 1. What does it mean to have a balanced NomCom at a point in time? For
> example, what criteria
> would you apply to measure or assess whether the NomCom is balanced? And
> further, how can
> one test whether or not the NomCom is balanced?
> 2. Do you support the view that the current composition of the NomCom
> needs to be rebalanced?
> Please explain why or why not.
> 3. How frequently does the balance need to be measured or assessed?
> 4. How do you suggest that the NomCom’s composition be rebalanced?
> 5. Who should conduct this work, and how should it be conducted?
> 6. How would your community group prioritize consideration of this issue
> within your planning
> efforts?
>
> We need to finish our response TOMORROW. I will open up a document later
> this evening but you can already start discussing our responses here in
> this thread.
>
> -Raoul
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com>
> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 10:54
> Subject: Re: URGENT - Time sensitive What is your view on on the question
> of rebalancing the Nominating Committee (NomCom)
> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>
>
> On 27/06/2023 23:14, dorothy g wrote:
> > I believe this is an issue that  concerns both NCUC and NPOC and so an
> > NCSG response is appropriate.
>
> Yes, it does concern NCUC, NPOC and NCSG, and we should coordinate our
> responses, but the question is directed separately to all 3
> constituencies/groups, so we should have 3 separate (but aligned)
> responses.
>
>         Julf
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/npoc-ec/attachments/20230630/323de800/attachment.html>