Re: [council] NC draft recomendations evolution v6
Philip,
The ISPCP constituency has reviewed this draft,
and, with regards
to the item "Board Composition", we wish to make
the following
comments:
Draft text - "The Board should be set at a size
that makes it workable
without the need for a smaller executive committee.
This means it
should have fewer members than at
present"
We disagree with this statement. There have been
recent initiatives to
form a ccTLD SO as well as the At Large SO, and
reducing the amount
of Board members would complicate the resolution of
these pending
initiatives. A reduction of the number of Board
members might also
complicate the issue of geographic
diversity.
Draft text - "Any nominating committee should only
have the power to nominate
one third or fewer of the Board seats or any other
ICANN entity"
The ISPCP has submitted a draft of our position on
the issue of reform to the NC,
and we disagree emphatically with the above
statement, which clearly implies
the acceptance that a nominating committee may
come into existence. ICANN
was born with an initial board elected by a
nominating committee (albeit one person),
and we prefer the current approach which
involves overall elections.
Tony Harris
|