[governance] ICANN - Request for Proposals for Independent Evaluator for GNSO Review

[Joe Baptista]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Veni Markovski wrote:

> Danny,
>
> I think you are not right.
> Do I need to tell you arguments, or you will trust my statement the same
> way you want us to trust yours, which is also without arguments?

you obviously not well versed in the icann process.  danny's
interpretation is correct.  danny has been around longer then you and he
knows how the processes work in fact - as opposed to fiction which is the
icann way.


All I see her of your argument is a need to be heard - but nothing in it
is factual - only speculative arguments which bear probably excuses.

Icann does as icann pleases - those are the fact if you had been paying
attention all these years since it's formation.

cheers
joe baptista

> If someone (incl. from the governance caucus) wants to participate and
> become part of the solutions, please do so. If they don't, then they can
> stay part of the problem, or part of the landscape.
> It's very easy to criticize any opinion, it's much more difficult to
> actually try to make a difference.
> For example, if the term was 30 days, people could have argued, that it's
> too long, and ICANN is delaying the review, until it's not needed.
>
> I can rephrase my answer in accordance with what you said, but I think
> it's not needed. Now, can we try to be more constructice, and somehow
> start to deal with serious issues seriuosly?
>
> Veni
>
> At 08:05 17-12-05  -0800, Danny Younger wrote:
>       Robert,
>
>       If ICANN was serious about conducting a proper search
>       for a suitable candidate for this job, they wouldn't
>       have limited a response time to six days from the
>       announcement date.
>
>       ICANN Staff has obviously already pre-selected a
>       certain candidate, knowing that they'll get
>       pre-determined conclusions reflected in the report
>       that will be generated.
>
>       The report will be just as much of a whitewash as was
>       the independant consultant review of the GNSO Council.
>
>       It's a rigged process from start to finish.
>
>
>       --- Robert Guerra <rguerra at lists.privaterra.org>
>       wrote:
>
>       > Of interest to the folks following and involved in
>       > ICANN....
>       >
>       >
>       > Request for Proposals for Independent Evaluator for
>       > GNSO Review
>       >
>       http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-14dec05.htm
>       >
>       >
>
>
> 1. Introduction
>
> 1.1. This document should be read in conjunction with the GNSO Review –
> Background Information document (found at
> http://www.icann.org/gnso/review-tor-background-04nov05.htm). Read
> together, the two documents provide the materials necessary to consider
> the GNSO Review Terms of Reference (GNSO ToR) which will be completed in
> early 2006. The documents reflect detailed consultation between ICANN
> Staff, the GNSO Council and between the GNSO Council and individual
> members of the ICANN Board.
>
> 1.2. ICANN now seeks to appoint an independent consultant to undertake
> the Review. The information outlined below illustrates the scope of the
> work and the selection criteria for evaluators.
>
> 2. Objectives
>
> 2.1. The review (among other actions) is designed to lead to improvements
> to one of the key policy development supporting organisations within the
> ICANN community. The ICANN Board requested a review of the GNSO in
> compliance with the ICANN Bylaws and resolved at its annual general
> meeting in Vancouver, Canada to formally initiate the review.
>
> 2.2. The review is due to begin in early February 2006 and should be
> completed by early Q2 2006. A full project timeline will be developed,
> but it is anticipated that a key milestone will include the presentation
> of a draft report at the Wellington, New Zealand meeting in March 2006.
>
> 2.3. The evaluation of the GNSO is expected to include face-to-face
> interviews, online surveys and desk research using information provided
> by the GNSO constituencies. The successful candidate is welcome to
> suggest additional forms of soliciting the information. ICANN will
> provide to the evaluation team baseline statistics that have been
> requested of each of the GNSO constituency chairs. ICANN will also
> provide background documentation and reports and access to a range of
> historical data.
>
> 2.4. Evaluators are expected to have detailed knowledge of or similar
> experience with policy making in an online environment, most particularly
> in relation to Internet governance.
>
> 3. Tender Scope and Conditions
>
> 3.1. Given the GNSO Review Terms of Reference found below and responding
> specifically to the requests for further information, applicants should
> provide:
>
> 3.1.1. Statement of Suitability. The Statement of Suitability must
> include a detailed outline of the applicant’s ability to perform the work
> showing past consultancies, research and publications.
>
> 3.1.2. Work Approach. The Work Approach needs to detail the way in which
> the applicant would respond to the Terms of Reference; provide details
> about specific skills with interview techniques, data gathering and
> report writing. Successful candidate will be required to communicate
> through email, conference calls, and video conference over IP.
>
> 3.1.3. Description of Final Product. Describe, prospectively, the form
> and organization of a final report. The report should be suitable for
> electronic transmission, i.e., limited file size and widely used format.
>
> 3.1.4. Team Curriculum Vitae. The response must include Curriculum Vitae
> for the whole team showing each individual’s suitability for the proposed
> work.
>
> 3.1.5. ICANN Contract Compliance: Applicants should warrant that they are
> willing to operate under a standard non-disclosure agreement.
>
> 3.1.6. The proposal should include a work schedule including key
> milestone dates and a statement of fees.
>
> 3.2. Interested applicants should submit preliminary expressions of
> interest by email to Kurt Pritz, Vice President, Business Operations (
> kurt.pritz at icann.org), and Dr. Liz Williams, Senior Policy Counselor
> (liz.williams at icann.org) by Tuesday 20 December 2005.
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance