[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the 2015 NomCom
Edward Morris
emorris at milk.toast.net
Tue Aug 26 14:41:59 CEST 2014
Thanks for your comments Carlos. Very interesting for a relative newbie to
read.
The solution, in my view, is quite easy and commonsensical. We merely need
to convert ICANN from being a California Public Benefits Corporation without
members to being a California Public Benefits Corporation with members, per
§5310 - §5313 of the California Corporations Code.
This certainly isn't a new idea but in my view it remains the best one. With
one minor jump through the Corporations Code, ICANN's problems with
accountability and Board legitimacy disappear. Mostly. Details are important
- who are the members, for example - but workable. It should be noted that
most PBC's do have members, it is ICANN that is the outlier.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
To: Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>, Kathy Kleiman
<kathy at kathykleiman.com>, "ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org"
<ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:06:29 -0300
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the 2015 NomCom
Yes, we "old-timers" recall the "big bang" of this -- the attempt to
elect board members through a planetary electoral process of the
Internet users in general, the so-called "netizens", a disaster which
ended up giving birth to this thing called ALAC.
Some people might think that the RIRs/NRO's method of electing board
members gives control to holders of number resources and not "to the
people". But does a NomCom provide any better solution to this
representation issue? BTW, I have never heard of this being a
significant problem in our NCUC dialogues, as we are historically mostly
concentrated on gTLD issues and processes -- not even with the current
IPv6 transition "crisis".
If ICANN ends up taking care of gTLDs only (and I agree we have to think
about how to separate policy from operation), and the board is elected
only by direct votes of domain name holders (registrants), there are
mechanisms to make sure there is equanimous representation irrespective
of the numbers of each domain etc.
[] fraterno
--c.a.
On 08/25/2014 10:52 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Yes, it's true, Carlos, the current board selection arrangements are an
incoherent mess and their incoherence derives mainly from the utter panic
that certain ICANN founders felt at the prospect of subjecting control of
ICANN's board to a vote of members - even though that is the norm in many
other areas.
>
> Milton L Mueller
> Laura J and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carlos A. Afonso [mailto:ca at cafonso.ca]
>> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 8:56 AM
>> To: Milton L Mueller; Kathy Kleiman; ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the 2015 NomCom
>>
>> In any case we do need to think of a better representation with the
abolition
>> of the NomCom once and for all, and with moving representation from the
>> contractor-"owner" relationship to the user or consumer of the resource.
>>
>> In the case of ccTLDs there are some good straightforward examples --
CIRA's
>> board is elected by the domain name holders, not registrars (although its
>> contracts -- both CIRA's and the domain holder -- are with registrars).
>>
>> If the IANA transition concludes with the IP addressing being managed by
>> some I* arrangement ex-ICANN (like formalizing NRO as the IP addressing
>> governance body, something which is basically already happening in
>> practice), and since ccTLDs are managed in practice by the respective
bodies
>> in each country (with a large variety of approaches), ICANN would be left
>> with the business of gTLDs only. I may be not accurate, but I think all
the RIRs
>> elect their boards much like LACNIC.
>>
>> If this were so, ICANN's board could be elected by the gTLD domain name
>> holders' community, in a direct mechanism which would ensure
>> proportionality (otherwise .com would always elect most if not all board
>> members).
>>
>> fraternal regards
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> On 08/24/2014 07:08 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>>> I think Kathy makes an important point. ICANN's contracts are with
>> registries and registrars, and more than 90% of its budget comes from
them.
>> This of course indirectly affects individual and organizational
registrants such
>> as the people we are supposed to represent. The idea that a board
selected
>> primarily by ccTLDs and RIRs would be deciding issues that are 90%
domains
>> doesn't make a lot of sense, either from an equity or an efficiency
>> standpoint.
>>>
>>> --MM
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org [mailto:ncuc-discuss-
>>>> bounces at lists.ncuc.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:51 AM
>>>> To: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the 2015 NomCom
>>>>
>>>> All,
>>>> My gut sense says that we should study this proposal closely. It
>>>> gives an awful lot of weight and votes to Supporting Organizations
>>>> that do not, themselves, allow ICANN a role in their governance (ASO,
>>>> ccNSO), but would now be having a much greater weight in appointing
>>>> representatives to our governance (namely the Board and its work with
>> GNSO issues). The implications could be astounding.
>>>>
>>>> I recommend that we talk more. I would value the review and input of
>>>> those who served on the Nominating Committee, those who have a
>> strong
>>>> knowledge of the other supporting organizations, and everyone.
>>>>
>>>> Like the proposal to change the GAC's power, this is one with great
>>>> implications for the GNSO.
>>>> Best,
>>>> Kathy
>>>> p.s. how does 5 GNSO representatives but only 3 votes mean? Can
>>>> anyone previously on the NomCom talk about some complexities that
>>>> might add (currently I think it is one rep, one vote).
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Further, i neglected to say, i think they thought it through in
>>>>> admirable fashion and make sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> I see their solution as being fair. I suggest we do not oppose it,
>>>>> neither as a constituency nor as SG, but rather comment individually
>>>>> if we wish.
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22-Aug-14 16:52, avri doria wrote:
>>>>>> The only people losing votes are csg Why is that a problem for ncsg?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Business is not our business. And as the lone civil society sg, we
>>>>>> should ally ourselves more with other non business.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not see this as a bad thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from a T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original message --------
>>>>>> From: Kathy Kleiman
>>>>>> Date:08/22/2014 4:21 PM (GMT-05:00)
>>>>>> To: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the 2015 NomCom
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wow, if these rules are adopted, we (the GNSO) would be outvoted by
>>>>>> Supporting Organizations who do not allow ICANN to run their
>>>>>> businesses (ccNSO and ASO). This is a real problem.
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Kathy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>> Carlos,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While it may not go away soon, it may look substantially different
>>>>>>> in the future. The Board Working Group Report on Nominating
>>>>>>> Committee
>>>>>>> (BWG-NomCom) was just released for public comment. I'm still
>>>>>>> digesting what they've recommended, but they propose some
>>>>>>> substantial
>>>> changes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bwg-nomcom-2014-08-21-
>> en
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I encourage everyone to take a moment to read through this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Brenden
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca
>>>>>>> <mailto:ca at cafonso.ca>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since this NomCom concoction will not go away any soon, I of
>> course
>>>>>>> support Brenden.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --c.a.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 08/22/2014 02:59 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>>>>>>> > Yes, +1 to Brenden.
>>>>>>> > Marília
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Robin Gross
>>>>>>> <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>>>>>>> > <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Brenden has my full support for 2nd term. NCUC is lucky
>>>>>>> that he is
>>>>>>> > willing to do it again.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>> > Robin
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:10 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> Hi,
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I'm all for Brenden staying on for another term as
NCUC's
>>>>>>> delegate
>>>>>>> >> to the NomCom. Glad he's willing.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Thanks.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Amr
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On Aug 22, 2014, at 9:31 AM, William Drake
>>>>>>> <wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>> Hi
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> We need to appoint a NCUC delegate to the 2015 ICANN
>> NomCom
>>>> in
>>>>>>> >>> the next week or so. It's unfortunate that NomCom's
cycle
>>>>>>> >>> doesn't synch with our election cycle but c'est la vie.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> *What is the Nomcom?*
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> ICANN's Nominating Committee (NomCom) is responsible
>> for the
>>>>>>> >>> selection of eight ICANN Board Members and for other
>>>>>>> selections
>>>>>>> >>> as are set forth in the Bylaws. (See Bylaws Article
VII,
>>>>>>> Section
>>>>>>> >>> 1 athttp://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VII-1
>>>>>>> <http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VII-1>)
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> The NomCom is also charged with appointing some members
>> of
>>>>>>> the At
>>>>>>> >>> Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Country Code Names
>>>>>>> >>> Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Council and the Generic
>> Names
>>>>>>> >>> Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council. The NomCom
>>>> complements
>>>>>>> >>> the other means for filling a portion of key ICANN
leadership
>>>>>>> >>> positions achieved within the Supporting Organizations
and
>>>>>>> >>> Advisory Committees.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Together, the NomCom and Supporting
>> Organization/Advisory
>>>>>>> >>> Committee selection pathways ensure that ICANN benefits
>> from
>>>>>>> >>> functional, cultural and geographic diversity in its
policy
>>>>>>> >>> development and decision-making as the Internet
evolves.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> *Who serves on Nomcom? *
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> ICANN's SOs and ACs send appointees to serve up to two
>>>>>>> >>> consecutive one-year terms on the Nomcom. You can read
>>>>>>> more about
>>>>>>> >>> the structure here <http://nomcom.icann.org
>>>>>>> >>> <http://nomcom.icann.org/>>.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> *Who is NCUC's current appointee to Nomcom?*
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> For 2014-2015, Brenden Kuerbis of the Internet
Governance
>>>>>>> Project
>>>>>>> >>> served. He took over for Rafik Dammak, who was elected
to
>>>>>>> NCSG Chair.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Brenden has expressed interest to the Exec Com in
>>>>>>> continuing as
>>>>>>> >>> NCUC's appointee. Despite joining midstream, he was
able
>>>>>>> to make
>>>>>>> >>> a positive impact from recruiting applicants to
selecting
>>>>>>> >>> individuals to positions. Selections were announced on
the
>>>>>>> ICANN
>>>>>>> >>> website August 15
>>>>>>> >>> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-08-15-
>> en>.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Next year is an important cycle for Nomcom. It includes
>>>>>>> >>> selections for 3 board seats and 2 NCAs to the GNSO, as
>>>>>>> well as
>>>>>>> >>> other positions. Brenden has asked the EC for names of
>>>>>>> people we
>>>>>>> >>> should approach about applying, as well as
opportunities
>>>>>>> where we
>>>>>>> >>> might do general outreach. He is also happy to speak
with us
>>>>>>> >>> about the process and how NCUC can best engage it.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Would anyone else be interested in being considered for
this
>>>>>>> >>> position? If so we could have the contending
applicants
>> make
>>>>>>> >>> their cases here on the list and then the EC would
decide
>>>>>>> taking
>>>>>>> >>> into account the views expressed, an assessment of the
>>>>>>> >>> applicants' qualifications, etc. If not, the EC can
just go
>>>>>>> >>> ahead and vote on Brenden's renewal.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Let's please move on this in the next week, before the
IGF.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Bill
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>> ***********************************************
>>>>>>> >>> William J. Drake
>>>>>>> >>> International Fellow & Lecturer
>>>>>>> >>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>>>>>>> >>> University of Zurich, Switzerland
>>>>>>> >>> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
>>>>>>> >>> ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org>
>>>>>>> <http://www.ncuc.org/>
>>>>>>> >>> william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
>>>>>>> >>> <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch
>>>>>>> <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>> (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com
>>>>>>> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >>> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>>
>>>> (lists),
>>>>>>> >>> www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
>>>>>>> <http://www.williamdrake.org/>
>>>>>>> >>>
>> ***********************************************
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> >>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>>
>>>>>>> >>>
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> >> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>>
>>>>>>> >>
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> > Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> > Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>>
>>>>>>> >
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>> > *Marília Maciel*
>>>>>>> > Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV
>>>>>>> Direito Rio
>>>>>>> > Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society
-
>>>>>>> FGV Law
>>>>>>> > School
>>>>>>> > http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu
>>>>>>> <http://www.diplomacy.edu> <http://www.diplomacy.edu>
>>>>>>> > PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee -
>> http://www.politics.org.br/
>>>>>>> > Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the
>>>>>>> > Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> > Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> > Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
<mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>>>>>> > http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
<mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>>>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>
>
_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20140826/6f66efd5/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list