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

[Subrenat, Jean-Jacques]

Terve, Tapani!

as mentioned in my reply to Avri (maybe you had not seen it yet),

"This discussion has made apparent, on the part of some members, a call for better process, diversity, etc., on the other hand a desire to retain current procedures. This happens all the time, in all communities. Alongside others who, prior to me, had brought up such issues, I offered my 2-centimes' worth of comment.

Going through this thread again, I don't see a suggestion of "stifling" anything. Like any other member, I'll follow with interest the process as it unfolds."

I notice that on the other thread, several colleagues have called for a change in the Bylaws.

Jean-Jacques.






----- Mail original -----
De: "Tapani Tarvainen" <ncuc at tapani.tarvainen.info>
À: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
Envoyé: Jeudi 6 Août 2015 14:16:49
Objet: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Delegate to the ICANN	2016 NominatingCommittee

On Aug 06 14:06, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques (jjs at dyalog.net) wrote:

> Going through this thread again, I don't see a suggestion of
> "stifling" anything. 

Could you please explain what you meant by this:

> On 05-Aug-15 15:58, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:

> > - Best practices on selection procedures make clear that putting
> > forward a name prior to an open call for candidates frequently has
> > a deterrent effect on the willingness of some members to declare
> > their candidacy, and may influence both the selection process and
> > the final outcome.

To me that sounds like you're saying such influence is bad
and that such discussion should therefore be, well, stifled,
or even outright banned. But apparently I misunderstood?

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss