<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Status report on implementation of evolution and reform
I do not want to inappropriately inject myself in a NC discussion, but may
I just ask a question for clarification? Why does two Board members per SO
automatically mean one US and one for the rest of the world? I would think
this would be an occasional but not inevitable result.
And if I could offer one clarification of my own: I believe that the Board
assumes that part of the NomCom process would be to ensure that the Board
was in the aggregate geographically diverse, taking into account what the
SO's do. In order to accomplish this, it may be that the NomCom process
will have to trail the SO process timing-wise, but that is an
implementation detail that will be worked out over the next several weeks.
As is mathematically obvious. whetther there are two or three Board members
from an SO, they will not be drawn from all the ICANN regions, so full
geographic diversity from each SO is not an attainable goal under any
circumstances.
Joe Sims
Jones Day Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Direct Phone: 1.202.879.3863
Direct Fax: 1.202.626.1747
Mobile Phone: 1.703.629.3963
"Philip
Sheppard" To: <council@dnso.org>
<philip.sheppard cc:
@aim.be> Subject: [council] Status report on implementation of evolution and
reform
Sent by:
owner-council@dn
so.org
07/16/02 09:53
AM
On strategy
So, if I am to understand Bruce, J.Scott and Ken, your idea is:
- to do nothing for the moment
- to see what ideas are generated elsewhere and then react to them
- to assume that every member of the Board read and agreed to every detail
of the blueprint
- to assume that the rest of the Board resolution meant nothing.
Is that where we are ?
On substance
The present recommendation for two reps per constituency on the Council
will likely mean one US and one for the rest of the world to fight out. The
Nom Com is not seeking to balance the diversity of the constituencies'
representation but the diversity of the whole NC. It is this aspect that
the NC resolution seeks to address. Does the IPC want two reps only ? Do
the Registrars want two reps only ? Do you assume the nom com may appoint
other IP or Registrar interests as well ? I doubt it.
Philip
==========
The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains
information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client
or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It
is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are
not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by
replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended
recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
==========
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|