[NCUC-EC] Soliciting Nominations of Candidates for NCUC Delegate to the ICANN 2016 NominatingCommittee

[PeterGreen]

Hi
On Aug 9, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:Given that Bill has already been nominated, it might be bestfor someone else in the EC to handle the process,including sending a call for nominations, collectingreplies and handling the discussion and vote within EC.
I just replied to a private message from Peter before seeing this list conversation.   As I said
On Aug 9, 2015, at 2:33 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
I forwarded the message from the Nomcom staff on 4 August. That was an open call, in forwarding it I was saying we have to fill this slot. Moreover, I pointed out in reply to Remmy,
On Aug 4, 2015, at 6:13 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:Obviously, other members can throw their hats in the ring as well, and I will recuse myself from the EC’s selection process.
There’s no specific bylaws procedure to follow, and this has never been a problem before.  I doubt anyone is confused about the matter, and two people have publicly expressed interest in being considered.  Do you think there’s someone who doesn’t understand?
While I don’t recall any previous EC appointment being turned into a spectacle or requiring procedural formalization (usually what it has required in my time is me pestering people repeatedly to please accept appointments, including for the Nomcom), I guess this case is different.
Yes, Bill, agree with you. This case is different now as Remmy has expressed his interest in the NomCom position, thus leading to some sort of competition situation. So previously an appointment becomes a procedural selection.  
As I have added at the end of the follow-up email, this proves people are more involved in this Consituency.
The EC has to put it on the table, otherwise people will complain about transparency issues.

Peter, could you please send a note to the list saying the EC will accept nominations on the timeline you suggested? Also, I think it would be useful to remind people somehow what this actually requires in terms of work and relationships and representation and why we have always been very careful to pick people who are a good fit, as indicated previously:
I have sent a follow-up call, with the points I think we should cover. Please see the email. 
If I have missed some points, please let me know.

On Aug 5, 2015, at 11:03 AM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:inter alia,
a.  Record of involvement with NCUC, contributions to the group, participation in its work, reliable linkages to people in various leadership positions and the general membership for the purpose of consultation, information flow, etc.
b.  A specification of Nomcom no. 2: wide contacts in and experience with global civil society, so that the person can plausibly try to recruit top people for top positions (e.g. there are board slots to fill).
c.  An ability to play well with other children.  The Nomcom is dominated by business groupings, ALAC, etc., and the politics and strategic games can be rather intense.  We actually had a NCUC representative resign a couple years ago in frustration, so it’s important that the person has the stomach for shenanigans, knows what the other groupings are trying to do and why, and can work with them well and be taken seriously.
Thanks
Bill


_______________________________________________
NCUC-EC mailing list
NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150810/48d4a35b/attachment.html>