[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the ICANN 2016 NominatingCommittee

[David Cake]

> On 6 Aug 2015, at 5:00 pm, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <jjs at dyalog.net> wrote:
> 
> To avoid any misunderstanding,
> 
> - Remmy: modifying the selection process would require a change in the Bylaws; it's up to the EC to decide if and when to propose to the membership that such a change should be made.
> 
> - David: being a recent member of NCUC, I have had no direct exposure to the difficulties you describe in having the process "run in an accountable and trusted way". But based on experience gathered elsewhere in ICANN, I don't think that is unsurmountable.

	We have annual elections. By accountable and trusted, I mean they are run by a separate automated system that requires things such as a separate email verification phase, and usually a lot of ‘get out the vote’ efforts by volunteers to ensure the number of votes hits the minimum to be considered valid. They are a fair bit or work.
	Of course it isn’t insurmountable (though some of the ways in which it could be made easier, such as reducing that minimum vote required, would reduce the quality of the democratic outcome in so doing). But it would be a significant proportion of our volunteer effort if we were to have ballots much more often than we already do, and we already have difficulty consistently getting enough volunteers for the more administrative aspects of NCUC work.

	In any case it is a secondary argument - while I think that running elections is more work than most realise, I think they would still be inappropriate for most of the roles we currently have selected by the EC (or NGSG PC) even if they took no volunteer time.

	Regards

		David

> 
> - James: I did not initiate this thread, but simply reacted to comments made by colleagues about what they saw as a need for some improvements, including greater diversity and better process. These latter requirements are a challenge in the wider context of ICANN, they won't just solve themselves, and each constituency can contribute to carrying things forward.
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "David Cake" <dave at difference.com.au>
> À: "Remmy Nweke" <remmyn at gmail.com>
> Cc: "William Drake" <william.drake at uzh.ch>, "NCUC-discuss" <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> Envoyé: Jeudi 6 Août 2015 10:07:45
> Objet: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the ICANN 2016	NominatingCommittee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 6 Aug 2015, at 2:09 am, Remmy Nweke < remmyn at gmail.com > wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks Bill for the explanation, which has actually thrown us back to Jean's earlier outlines for consideration.
> 
> "I would suggest the following steps, which can all be taken in a fairly brief and simple way:
> - the current Executive Council (EC) of NCUC sends out a call for candidates for the position of Delegate to the NomCom,
> - this call is accompanied by a reminder of the relevant Bylaws, and of the desired criteria of NCUC (diversity, etc.),
> - the EC calls a vote on the list of candidates who satisfy the criteria; all registered members of NCUC may vote,
> - the individual garnering the most votes can then be appointed by NCUC.”
> 
> Two points to make here:
> Changing NomCom representative from a selected to an elected position would be, as Bill points out, a change from both our existing bylaws and our long term practice. Changing our bylaws is a significant change, and should be a process we should take only after significant discussion, and I would suggest that discussion is best down outside of the context of any specific position.
> 
> 
> And I think this suggesting seriously underestimates the effort required in a vote among the constituency. Every time we have a vote, it takes a lot of effort, both by staff and constituency leadership, to ensure that it is run in an accountable and trusted way, and that we have sufficient votes for it to count. We already have a democratic vote (with diversity requirements) for the EC. Making currently selected positions elected would take a very large amount of effort, and make running the constituency both harder work and more difficult to do efficiently. And I’m unconvinced it would deal with the diversity requirements any better.
> 
> 
> I personally would not support the change of NomCom representative from a selected to an elected position. But even if I did, I would suggest that suddenly changing from the procedure established in our bylaws on this one position would be inappropriate.
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> David
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20150806/6eb2be69/attachment.sig>