[ncdnhc-discuss] Re: The propsed NomCom

Sat Jun 1 21:22:19 CEST 2002

Joe, we have made detailed suggestions to the Committee.  The CPTech
comments, the TACD comments, and the proposed resolutions in the GA and the
NCC all address the issue of who elects the board.  The fundamental position
is that the board should not elect itself, or even elect the specific
electors, which is close to the same thing.   We also proposed that the
existing board be replaced under whatever system is proposed, as a test of
its fairness and good faith in the new system.  You didn't even bother to
acknowledge that these views had been presented in the report, so I infer
from that what type of weight these suggestions are given.

I am also among those who are restless at constant insults to our
intelligence.  Are we supposed to read this report without thinking that the
board has dismantled every bit of voice that of its critics have, and assume
like trusting children the board is going to populate the NomCom with
independent voices?   A mere detail to be worked out later?  What can you
point to that would give any reasonable person any confidence that this
would happen?

Maybe the true believers think the current ICANN BOD/staff/counsel will
go into the wilderness and come back with the names of the "right" people
through some divine intervention.  I'm not one of them.  Under the new
structure nothing is about consensus, and everything is about who controls
votes.

You have made it clear in your comments to me, as has Stuart Lynn in the
Washington Post, that "democracy" is a terrible idea for ICANN.  Ok.  What
replaces a democracy, exactly?    Adult supervision from a multilateral
government body?  A legal instrument that actually limits what ICANN can do?
A set of incentives to get things right?  Vint's reputation for developing
protocols?   You have had plenty of time to think about this.   Years of
course.   What is the answer?   Right now ICANN can't explain to anyone
where the board comes from.

  Jamie

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Sims" <jsims at JonesDay.com>
To: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
Cc: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>; "vint cerf"
<discuss at icann-ncc.orgdiscuss>; "Joe Sims"
<discuss at icann-ncc.orgdiscussdiscuss>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 2:56 PM
Subject: Re: The propsed NomCom

Jamie, do me a favor and quit trying to imagine that you can read the
Board's or the Committee's minds, and I'll stop trying to read yours.  You
are quick to assume motives that I don't believe exist, but apparently
neither of us will convince the other.  Why not just deal with what's on the
table, and debate the merits of that.  The Board has asked for suggestions
on how to populate the NomCom.  My personal view is that it should be made
up of persons representing the full range of interests within ICANN, but I
am agnostic about how they get there.  If you would take the time to create
a "Civil Liberties" constituency, that would certainly have a claim to be
included in the NomCom, along with the other constituencies.  And so on.  I
assume that the Committee asked for ideas, rather than making a
recommendation, because it did not have a clear idea on how this should be
done; at least, that is the logical explanation.  Why not provide some
specific ideas, that are consistent with the broader objectives set forth,
and see what happens?

Joe Sims
Jones Day Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Direct Phone:  1.202.879.3863
Direct Fax:  1.202.626.1747
Mobile Phone:  1.703.629.3963

==============================
The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains
information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or
other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not
an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying
to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination,
distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is
not authorized and may be unlawful.
==============================

-----"James Love" <james.love at cptech.org> wrote: -----

To: "Joe Sims" <jsims at JonesDay.com>
From: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
Date: 06/01/2002 01:03PM
cc: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>, "vint cerf"
<discuss at icann-ncc.orgdiscuss>, "Joe Sims"
<discuss at icann-ncc.orgdiscussdiscuss>
Subject: Re: The propsed NomCom

Joe, this isn't about tricks. I'm happy to quote whatever you like. But
more important, if the NomCom choose the board members. Who chooses the
NomCom? The conclusion I reach after reading the proposal is, the board,
just like the board selects almost everything else. If in fact you can
explain who will choose the NomCom, I would appreciate this information.
I can't see that this is a minor detail. It determines who controls ICANN.
Since you have wacked the ASO, PSO, DNSO bottom up elections (sans a single
ASO member), and wacked the elected at large. It is natural to ask, who
picks the NomCom. Please tell me it isn't the ICANN BOD. Are we
supposed to wait to find out who actually elects the electors of the board,
as if this is some minor detail to be worked out later? Is there any reason
to expect the NomCom will be populated independent of the BOD. So far,
everything is about the BOD consolidating its control, and getting rid to
critics. Jamie

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Sims" <jsims at JonesDay.com>
To: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
Cc: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>; "vint cerf"
<discuss at icann-ncc.orgdiscuss>; "Joe Sims"
<discuss at icann-ncc.orgdiscussdiscuss>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: The propsed NomCom

Jamie, if you were trying to be productive, you would quote the entire text,
which would show that the Committee is soliciting comments on how to
populate the NomCom. Rather than throw out random hyperbole to see if any
of it sticks, why not actually try to contribute to the process by making
recommendations? I know it is harder to play a constructive role than it is
to simply issue knee-jerk criticism, but I also know you are capable of it
when you want to. Now would be a good time.,

IV. Nominating Committee Composition and Responsibility

Since this body, in our conception, will be responsible for selecting a
significant portion of the Board, it should be a body that is broadly
representative of the entire ICANN community. This is a challenge, of
course: to create a broadly representative and diverse body that is small
enough to function, likely to be able to locate the kind of people ICANN
needs each time the selection is made, and able to persuade them to be
willing to serve on the Board. The NomCom should particularly include people
that know and have access to many other people who could potentially be
productive Board members, since a major part of this job will be to persuade
people who may not have otherwise considered the possibility of serving on
the ICANN Board.

In our view, the NomCom must include both delegates (we use that word to
reflect our view that, while they may come from a particular community, they
have a broader responsibility and should not be subject solely to
instructions from that community) from the various policy-development bodies
and advisory committees of ICANN (including the GAC) and from other groups
with interests in the information society and the Internet. It should draw
from the technical community (especially those who have broad knowledge
about the strengths and weaknesses of various members of the technical
community), as well as from the various social communities interested in
ICANN's work. It might include former Board members and others with direct
knowledge of what skills are necessary to be an effective ICANN Board
member. In our view, it should be chaired by a sitting Board member who is
not up for reappointment; this Chair should be non-voting but responsible
for managing the process to a successful conclusion in a timely manner.

There is a broad range of sizes proposed for the NomCom, as well as for the
duration of terms for its members.

Q5. Comments Requested: We choose not to specify at this time a
recommended size or composition of the NomCom, but we invite specific
suggestions for exactly how it should be composed, consistent with the views
expressed above.

The NomCom would be open to recommendations from any and all sources, and
would be expected to consult with all the various ICANN communities in
arriving at an appropriate slate of new Board members. There have been some
suggestions that either the final slate as a whole, or the individuals that
make up that slate, should be ratified by the Board to ensure that the
candidates selected in fact meet the needs of the Board at that time. We
have not adopted this suggestion at this time, but it is worth further
consideration.

Q6. Comments Requested: We solicit comment on whether the selections
of Board members by the Nominating Committee should be subject to
ratification by the Board.

In addition to the selection of Board members, the NomCom should be
responsible for the selection of those members of SO Steering Committees
that are not directly selected by the SO members or constituencies.

Joe Sims
Jones Day Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Direct Phone: 1.202.879.3863
Direct Fax: 1.202.626.1747
Mobile Phone: 1.703.629.3963

==============================
The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains
information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or
other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not
an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying
to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination,
distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is
not authorized and may be unlawful.
==============================

-----"James Love" <james.love at cptech.org> wrote: -----

To: "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
From: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
Date: 06/01/2002 10:12AM
cc: "vint cerf" <vinton.g.cerf at wcom.com>, "Joe Sims" <jsims at JonesDay.com>
Subject: The propsed NomCom

In the May 31 document, the Committee on ICANN reform proposes the creation
of a Nominating Committee, called the NomCom, that will both nominate *and*
elect (possibly subject to acceptance by the ICANN board) 5 to 11 members of
the ICANN board. The members of the NomCom will be selected by, the
ICANN BOD. So effectively, the ICANN board elects its electors.

This is I guess the Cuba, Iraq or IOC method of doing things, to make sure
an unpopular or incompetent regime can stay in power.

Jamie

http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/working-paper-process-07may02.ht
m

"In our view, the NomCom must include both delegates (we use that word to
reflect our view that, while they may come from a particular community, they
have a broader responsibility and should not be subject solely to
instructions from that community) from the various policy-development bodies
and advisory committees of ICANN (including the GAC) and from other groups
with interests in the information society and the Internet. It should draw
from the technical community (especially those who have broad knowledge
about the strengths and weaknesses of various members of the technical
community), as well as from the various social communities interested in
ICANN's work. It might include former Board members and others with direct
knowledge of what skills are necessary to be an effective ICANN Board
member. In our view, it should be chaired by a sitting Board member who is
not up for reappointment; this Chair should be non-voting but responsible
for managing the process to a successful conclusion in a timely manner."

--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040