<div dir="ltr">What it really boils down to, is that only a few constituencies can't be simply paid off.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 24 November 2016 at 20:01, James Gannon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net" target="_blank">james@cyberinvasion.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:14px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">
<div>
<div>
<div>I think that the stakeholder balance across the GNSO and in NomCom is a little more complex than just business vs non business. I agree some reform is needed however.</div>
<div>
<div id="m_1984478909721971443MAC_OUTLOOK_SIGNATURE"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-James</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="m_1984478909721971443OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:12pt;text-align:left;color:black;BORDER-BOTTOM:medium none;BORDER-LEFT:medium none;PADDING-BOTTOM:0in;PADDING-LEFT:0in;PADDING-RIGHT:0in;BORDER-TOP:#b5c4df 1pt solid;BORDER-RIGHT:medium none;PADDING-TOP:3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>Ncuc-discuss <<a href="mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">ncuc-discuss-bounces@lists.<wbr>ncuc.org</a>> on behalf of Raoul Plommer <<a href="mailto:plommer@gmail.com" target="_blank">plommer@gmail.com</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Thursday 24 November 2016 at 17:57<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>William Drake <<a href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch" target="_blank">william.drake@uzh.ch</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>NCUC-discuss <<a href="mailto:ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NomCom Review<br>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">I think the businesses are taking all the damn seats.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 24 November 2016 at 17:39, William Drake <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch" target="_blank">william.drake@uzh.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Hi Raoul
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There are new interests coming in with the new gTLDs, and it’s not impossible that at some point there’d be new constituencies seeking slots. Long running debate with regard to GNSO generally. So when the WG is up and running they along with everyone else
may need to think about the future evolution of the community.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cheers</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Bill</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div class="m_1984478909721971443h5">
<div>On Nov 24, 2016, at 16:10, Raoul Plommer <<a href="mailto:plommer@gmail.com" target="_blank">plommer@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="m_1984478909721971443m_4012361650429485257Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="m_1984478909721971443h5">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 24 November 2016 at 12:14, William Drake <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch" target="_blank">william.drake@uzh.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span style="float:none;display:inline">Meanwhile the three CSG constituencies get four reps (two for the BC!) and contracted also gets two reps. <b>How this will evolve if/when we new DNS industry constituencies due to the new gTLD program is hard to
say</b>, but the above mentioned 2014 Board Working Group on the NomCom most certainly got it wrong in suggesting that NomCom should be restructured as follows to avoid “GNSO over-representation”:</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div> Could you elaborate on the bit I bolded? Didn't quite understand the possible ramifications.</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>
<div><span style="float:none;display:inline"></span></div>
</div>
<div><span style="float:none;display:inline">I think the notion of one rep per GNSO stakeholder group might be salable to the wider community, although of course CSG would fight it tooth and nail as they have four reps to one each for the registries, registrars,
and NCUC. But the rest of the Board’s suggestions were pretty ill-considered. And one per SG would not offset the fact that ALAC has five.</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<div>You mean the CSG has four reps, of which <b>two </b>belong to the businesses large and small, one for the ISPs and one for the IP. Registrars and registries are also businesses so basically there is only one seat for non-commercial interests, whereas 6/7
GNSO seats are motivated by profit only. This is the most outrageous part in this and I can not comprehend, how they managed to take out the academic seat in the first place, but yeah, obviously I'm still learning about ICANN...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Here is the list of seats in the NomCom and how they are currently spread:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>The nominating committee has 17 seats <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/nomcom2016-members-2016-02-18-en" target="_blank">
at the moment</a>, altogether:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>7 from the GNSO:</div>
<div>4x CSG (1 for small, one for big businesses, one for IP and one for the ISPs)</div>
<div>1x NCSG/NCUC</div>
<div>1x Registrars</div>
<div>1x Registries</div>
<div>***************</div>
<div>1x ASO</div>
<div>1x ccNSO</div>
<div>1x SSAC</div>
<div>1x RSSAC</div>
<div>***************</div>
<div>5x ALAC (1 for each region)</div>
<div>1x IAB for IETF</div>
<div>***************</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div><span style="float:none;display:inline"></span></div>
<div><span style="float:none;display:inline">Other routes could be to focus at the constituency rather than SG level, and try to get one for NPOC, or even for academics (there’s a history there). That’d still leave us with less than CSG though.</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yes, I think that is the least we could be happy with, is getting a seat for the NPOC, so I would set that as a minimum. The best outcome in my view would be taking no less than three seats off the CSG if we were really to go down the route of having one
seat per SG. I don't think that would be too hard to sell for the other SGs either.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In any event, we’d need to think through bargaining positions—opening bids, what we’d settle for after negotiation, etc., taking into account the preferences of the rest of the community represented on NomCom.</div>
<div><span style="float:none;display:inline"><br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Absolutely. We need to engage with the relevant people within the SGs as well as ALAC, before we make any decisions on strategy. For example, Rubens suggested dialuting some of the votes, for example, ALAC could have 0.8 or 0.6 votes per geographical region.
There are many moving parts and first we need to map out all different, favourable outcomes and evaluate, which of them have most chances in succeeding and are they worth the fight. Some of these options definitely are.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Raoul</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<span>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<span><br>
<div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word">
******************************<wbr>******************<br>
William J. Drake<br>
International Fellow & Lecturer<br>
Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ<br>
University of Zurich, Switzerland<br>
<a href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch" target="_blank">william.drake@uzh.ch</a> (direct),<wbr> <a href="mailto:wjdrake@gmail.com" target="_blank">wjdrake@gmail.com</a> (lists),<br>
<a href="http://www.williamdrake.org" target="_blank">www.williamdrake.org</a><br>
******************************<wbr>******************</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></span>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>