[NCUC-DISCUSS] Nomcom
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Sat Jul 29 22:06:43 CEST 2017
I certainly did not mean to imply that all the plus one's were just
popularity; many were accompanied by statements of the excellent
qualities of the candidate. I just meant to remind everyone that being
our only rep on the Nomcom, means figuring out how to advance our goals
for better representation, more diversity, more people who understand
end user needs and risks, etc. We are seriously out numbered at nomcom,
and getting cooperation with other evaluators to choose someone who will
be fair to our interests strikes me as the major challenge. Getting the
trust of the other reps on the Nomcom is not done overnight, and
requires some skills. I hope that is one of the qualities which the EC
is going to evaluate.
Cheers SP
On 2017-07-29 15:58, flavio at inf.ufrgs.br wrote:
> Many +1's for a candidate do not show "popularity", but strong support
> from the community, indicating that s/he represents many voices and
> positions in this community. This should be well received and well
> interpreted by the EC. Or should the EC nominate someone who is
> supported by only a few people in the community? The EC should feel
> comfortable seeing strong support for both names.
>
> Best
>
> Flávio
>
> Em 29 de jul de 2017 4:21 PM, Stephanie Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> escreveu:
>
> I do agree with Dorothy that this is not a popularity
> contest....we have two great candidates, and the exec cttee will
> have to figure out what the job demands and pick the better
> candidate in their best judgement. I recommend they ask Bill and
> Brenden, our two most recent Nomcom reps, to tell them the
> challenges of the role. It would not hurt to discuss exactly what
> we want out of Nomcom, and what kind of candidates we think we
> need for all the appointees.
>
> cheers Stephanie
>
>
>
> On 2017-07-29 14:21, dorothy g wrote:
>
> In my view since this is a decision which will be taken by the
> Executive the +1 points are just background noise in the cases
> where specific reasons linked to the position are not given.
> This should not be a popularity contest.
>
> The Executive should clarify the criteria for their
> decision-making in relation to the specific demands of the job.
>
> Great that we have two very strong candidates.
>
> best
> D
>
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Wisdom Donkor
> <wisdom.dk at gmail.com <mailto:wisdom.dk at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hello Renata,
>
> Thanks for the email. I do agree with you on all point
> raised.
>
> Few questions on my mind.
> Are there any voting guidelines, nomination guidelines,
> campaign guidelines etc?. if yes, i think all this
> information will have to be made available to all members
> and if no, we will have to begin to work on one.
>
> Also, when does voting starts and ends and for how long?.
> I no in some instances voting is done for a period of one
> week or more.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> *WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)*
> E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist*
> *
> ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,
> Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation
> Member,
> OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN Memember, ITAG Member
> Email: wisdom.dk at gmail.com <mailto:wisdom.dk at gmail.com>
> Skype: wisdom_dk
> facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
> Website: www.data.gov.gh <http://www.data.gov.gh/>
> www.isoc.gh <http://www.isoc.gh/> / www.itag.org.gh
> <http://www.itag.org.gh/>
>
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
> <raquino at gmail.com <mailto:raquino at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> What makes me worried about some of the +1
> - people who never contribute, yet sometimes oppose
> openly to NCUC's
> actions +1'ing candidates
> - observers on the list who are holding positions in
> other stakeholder
> groups - again normally having opposite positions.
> even if not voting,
> attempting to influence an election
> - a +1 w/ no justification leaves us to wonder whether
> there's a real
> reason for support or it's "i'm friends w/ the candidate"
> - new members rarely get +1s. this makes the elections
> look like the
> dancing chairs game with always the same ppl playing
>
> That being said, it's a good thermometer of a
> candidacy. Including the
> show its transparency.
>
> So thanks for the candidates participation once more
> and members
> voices in the process
>
> Best,
>
> Renata
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> <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
> <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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170729/53f026f5/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list