<div dir="ltr">So let me get this clear, you asked those others as well, and they said they had also been pressurised into nominating Dave but were unwilling to do so? <div><br></div><div>I seriously don't think that's true and I would've nominated him myself, hadn't I already nominated another. I think that could be seen as dictative behavior during the elections, from the less active members' viewpoint. Dave has been most welcome to NPOC EC to share his experience with policy that we have really struggled with for too long now. I remember asking him to join NPOC as early as Copenhagen.</div><div><br></div><div>Whatever you might want to make it appear like, Dave did not have to plea for his nomination in the last NPOC elections. For the NCUC elections he made his dual position abundantly clear and the members voted for him despite it. It really has nothing to do with the nominator in my view. Instead of making speculative personal attacks against a newly elected officer, I advise you to stick to the facts and only them.</div><div><br></div><div>-Raoul</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 20:56, Ayden Férdeline <<a href="mailto:icann@ferdeline.com">icann@ferdeline.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>Hi there,<div><br></div><div>I think this is a discussion for the NCUC list, as it concerns the outcome of an NCUC election.</div><div><br></div><div>As for the comment you quoted below, the person who told me that is actually the person who formally nominated David to serve in that role. They felt pressured to make the nomination because no one else wanted to, and they said that they had been asked to do so. I am not going to name this person here, but with a little detective work, they could of course be identified. My email was factual.</div><div><br></div><div>Ayden<br><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 11 Oct 2018, at 19:45, Raoul Plommer <<a href="mailto:plommer@gmail.com" target="_blank">plommer@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="m_4120485456577142445Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div dir="ltr">First of all, this should really be a discussion for the NCSG list. It's a matter for the whole stakeholder group as clearly as possible. That's why I'm catching up late on this. <br><br>There's been good points that I can agree with and we have actually discussed this matter in the NPOC already before the election results and will decide on it in Barcelona. So everybody hold their horses until then, please.<div><br></div><div>What did catch my eye, was a little tidbit I really didn't like:<br><div><br>Ayden says to Dave:</div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><pre style="white-space:pre-wrap">I understand you were nominated for the NPOC PC role only after you asked many different NPOC members off-list to nominate you.</pre></blockquote><div>Could you please elaborate, how did you reach this conclusion exactly? Both me and Joan asked Dave to join NPOC EC for the policy chair's position. Who actually nominates the candidates, is usually trivial. It seems like an obvious smearing attempt to me because it's a purposeful bending of the truth at best, a nasty lie at worst. Which is it Ayden? Whichever it is, I think you shouldn't be moralising people about "setting fires", with these sorts of hurtful speculations that have no truth in them.</div><div><br></div><div>-Raoul</div><div><br></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 16:47, Remmy Nweke <<a href="mailto:remmyn@gmail.com" target="_blank">remmyn@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Thanks Stephanie for your Frank disposition.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Remmy</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 11 Oct 2018 1:58 p.m., "Stephanie Perrin" <<a href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca" target="_blank">stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida
Grande">Hi Everyone!<br>
</font></font></p><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida
Grande">I have been staying out of this discussion because as
the incoming NCSG Chair, I sense that a torch may be thrown in
my direction two weeks from now, and I will have to undertake
some revision of our Charter. As others have stated, there is
no rule that prevents a person from running for both
constituencies. I believe there are such rules in other SGs,
and I will do my homework over the next two weeks.</font></font></p><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida
Grande">As Dorothy has said so well, fractious (if frank)
discussions on this list may not be helping us work together.
Perhaps we can try to focus on some positive steps moving
forwards. And if I may paraphrase what she said in her second
last sentence...the proof of the pudding is in the eating. <br>
</font></font></p><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida
Grande">Personally, I do feel that we should have some kind of
rule whereby a person represents one constituency at a
time....which is not to say in the slightest that we cannot
move back and forth, join both, or become just an NCSG member
eschewing all identification of constituency. The plain fact
is that taking a leadership role in NCSG, wherever one does
it, is demanding. Our primary job here is policy
development.....and as I have said many times, if you are not
paying attention to policy, not following the development of
documents and comments, you are not really helping us out in
our primary work. To all those who do....who volunteer to
hold the pen, pester the other commenters to contribute on
time, etc., many many thanks. As leaders, we hate having to
do this all the time. To my way of thinking, all leaders
should be following the PDP work and sharing that load, which
is a serious time commitment. We should not have to rely on a
few workhorses to actually join the PDPs and do the fighting.
We are stretched to the limits folks. If tempers seem a
little frayed on this list at times, please be understanding.
Just ask me how many hours some of our people are putting in
on our collective behalf....I try to keep track.</font></font></p><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida
Grande">So while I hope this discussion will all be resolved
amicably by the time I take over from Farzi as NCSG
Chair....and noting that she has been working absolutely
tirelessly on our behalf, under difficult and trying
circumstances....I would be happy to discuss whether a rule
change is in order. Thanks to those who have made this
suggestion.<br>
</font></font></p><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">At
some point, preferably not in the middle of a rather heated
discussion, I would like to bring up the topic of how we
communicate on this list. We have different cultural
expectations, in my view. For some of us, a frank discussion
of facts can be construed as a personal attack. As a North
American, I tend to favor frankness, hopefully with a view to
appreciating that people are volunteering their time and have
feelings and interests wrapped up in this work. Nevertheless,
we need to be able to discuss what is happening, introduce
facts, and not be worried about flattering everyone all the
time. If it will help, I will undertake to send out a "good
job everyone!!!" note every month to remind us (and myself)
that we are all trying our best. However, please let us not
take criticism personally. We need to be direct with one
another to be clear about our expectations and goals.</font></font></p><div class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542signature-text"><p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Stephanie
Perrin<br>
</font></font></p></div><div class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542elided-text">
<div class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-10-10 02:54, dorothy g wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Dear Friends, These exchanges are not helping to
build our community. Also certain language and accusations have
been made by some parties that are not helpful. Please stop and
let us get on with the main tasks. If there are serious
procedural concerns we should be clear on what exactly needs to
be changed and why without personalising the situation. I
believe our two communities work together and we should not
squabble over travel support.This is petty. Let us appreciate
that different members of the community contribute in different
ways. Someone was elected. If the rules made them ineligible
that should have been sorted out before the election. Let us
move on.
<div>Farzaneh, Thanks for objecting to those 'gender-biased'
adjectives. Women should not be bullied into silence. As I
have said earlier we will miss you. We may not always agree
but I have always found you to be professional in your
approach.<br>
<div>David let me say that most of us are looking forward to
you making stellar contributions during your term. This
remains the best way to silence detractors.</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>best regards</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:37 AM David Cake <<a href="mailto:dave@davecake.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">dave@davecake.net</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><br>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On 10 Oct 2018, at 10:53 am, Raphaël
Beauregard-Lacroix <<a href="mailto:rbeauregardlacroix@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbeauregardlacroix@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>The only certainty I have in the current case
is that out of fairness, it should not be possible
to pile up travel grants by virtue of holding
multiple positions. Again, I do not know whether
this has occurred or is occuring in our present
case. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And what I understand here as "piling up" is
not having several opportunities to obtain travel
funds for one given meeting, but actually
obtaining more than "one" allocation of travel
funds through the multiple hats or getting travel
funds more often than others just by virtue of
holding several positions. I do not know what
coordinating mechanisms there are between
NCSG/NPOC/NCUC as far as travel grants are
concerned, and whether there are rules as to "who
pays" (or who <i>should </i>pay) for people with
multiple hats, but that is also something that
could and should be discussed. </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<span class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985m_1914150582591474485m_9042148869333495478Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>Travel
funding is a complex issue, but I do not believe that
acquiring multiple travel funding without re-allocation is
likely to happen within our current SG system. There are
some slight wrinkles here and there (such as using funds
from one sources to top up travel support from another, as
has happened for various reasons when ICANN funding does
not cover a full meeting or meeting associated events),
but I certainly do not anticipate that the amount of
travel resources available overall will be in any way
reduced. </div>
<div><span class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985m_1914150582591474485m_9042148869333495478Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>There
are also, of course, funding for various special purpose
roles within ICANN (such as WGs, mentoring, etc), but they
each have separate rules.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985m_1914150582591474485m_9042148869333495478Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span>David</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
<a class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a>
<a class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542m_-1685287360984591985moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div></div><div class="m_4120485456577142445m_-3553660894229908542elided-text">
_______________________________________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________<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="https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></blockquote></div>