<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 10 Oct 2018, at 7:14 pm, Ayden Férdeline <<a href="mailto:icann@ferdeline.com" class="">icann@ferdeline.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class=""><span style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">Hi David,</span><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">In this email you seem to deflect from answering my questions by trying to turn them back on me. With respect, I did not run for office — you did!</div><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I said your arguments as problematic, by using you as an example of how they could equally be applied to you, or others. </div><div>I assume by not answering, you concede the point. </div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">So let’s put the facts on the table. You were nominated by an NCUC member who is not active in our policy work. Did you request this nomination?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I find the focus on James Gitau extremely impolite to him, and I also find this line of discussion post-election quite unreasonable. But no, I did not, and it was a complete surprise to me. I do not ever recall having had any interaction with him that was not entirely public, though its possible we talked about our dental problems in Hyderabad or something at some point. </div><div><br class=""></div><div>My nomination was also supported by a previous NCUC and NCSG Chair. </div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class=""> I ask because I understand you were nominated for the NPOC PC role <i class="">only after you asked many different NPOC members off-list to nominate you.</i></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>You can understand what you like, but that is also untrue. I do not know why you think broadcasting hearsay at this point adds to the discussion. </div><div>I was approached by one member of NPOC to run for the position to resolve some perceived issues within NPOC, and that came from them, and was not initiated by me. I consulted with others to ensure it was not perceived as hostile. </div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">You go on in your email to conflate ICANN-related activities, like being a part of a working group and serving in a constituency leadership role, as being the same as serving two different constituencies with different priorities and interests. This is a false equivalency.</div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>No, I pointed out the arguments based on time commitments are false if they ignore policy work. </div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class=""> We have different constituencies within the NCSG because they are different (though there might be overlap at times), as is the case within the Commercial Stakeholders Group for example. The Intellectual Property Constituency might have common interests with the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency at times, but they are ultimately not one and the same. </div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>We are structured differently in many different ways, including explicitly allowing membership in multiple constituencies within our charter (or none). There is a long history within NCSG/NCUC of disagreement regarding with an exclusive membership model that goes back to the creation of NCSG back around 2009, and wanting a system based more around overlapping interest groups. Like many veterans, I simply do not think the CSG model is applicable to civil society. </div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">You then state that there is “one constituency [I] do not like”, which is a claim I reject, and I hope this false claim is not something that you have taken back to NPOC. You spoke in your campaign about building bridges between the NCUC and NPOC; if you have been setting fires instead, creating the impression that there is some kind of tension beneath the surface that only you can resolve, that would be disappointing to learn.</div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>OK, I withdraw the implication. But I don’t recall ever mentioning you specifically to anyone in NPOC. But you certainly seem very wedded to the idea that the relationship between the two is implicitly competitive. </div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">I agree that some people are capable of serving in multiple leadership roles. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with this provided they can do them all justice. You cite Farzaneh being both a full EPDP delegate and NCSG Chair. She has a near-perfect attendance rate on the EPDP, and is active on the mailing list. She is also active as NCSG Chair. So for some people the answer is definitely ‘yes’ that they can faithfully serve multiple demanding roles. </div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Exactly, we finally agree that one can serve in multiple positions within ICANN. And none of us can devote ‘100%' of our time to it unless we are unemployed or employed by ICANN. <br class=""><div><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div style="caret-color: rgb(39, 39, 40); color: rgb(39, 39, 40); font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">Given this, do you have the time to devote to the NCUC and all of your other leadership roles?</div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Yes. It’s two EC positions, and I won’t be leadership of a major WG. And a few issues in my personal life last year are no longer a factor. I have some specific plans for both positions that I hope will improve NCSG between them. I can’t </div><div><br class=""></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>David</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>