[governance] Stepping down as IGC 08 Nomcom chair.

[Adam Peake]

Suggest we wait until we have heard from Ian as 
the new nomcom chair.  After that, if the caucus 
wishes to redo the process then it might be a 
good idea to ask the whole nomcom if they would 
continue. Robert seems unavailable for a while 
(perhaps not?)  Would we want to continue if some 
members of the nomcom we not able to continue?

It's not completely clear to me what re-doing the 
process would achieve.  Is it process for the 
sake of process, or do we expect a more valid 
outcome?

There's a consultation coming up.  It would be 
really helpful if the caucus focused on that as 
well.  It really does help MAG members to know 
what the caucus is thinking, what issues should 
be on the agenda, what format is preferred, 
comments about experiences in Rio. Much of this 
would repeat or add to comments from the February 
consultation, but responses to the MAG's papers:

Draft programme outline 
<http://intgovforum.org/hydera/DraftProgramme.Hyderabad-draft.26.03.2008.pdf>
Summary of the MAG meeting 
<http://intgovforum.org/AGD/MAG.Summary.28.02.2008.v3.pdf>

would be helpful.

The consultation process gives us the opportunity 
for comment, MAG response/interpretation, 
comment, etc.  Let's not miss that.

Thanks,

Adam




At 5:23 PM +0100 4/30/08, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>Hi,
>I probably shouldn't speak up on this issue 
>since I am one of the candidates but what the 
>heck...
>
>I still try to figure out what I find more 
>messy, recalling a nomcom decision or sticking 
>to a nomcom decision that may have been affected 
>by unclear rules.
>It is obvious that a discussion of the desirable 
>number of nominees would have a direct influence 
>on the nomcom's decision making.
>What I don't understand is in what way an 
>earlier publication of the candidate's 
>statements would have affected the nomcom's 
>outcome. Or is the issue yet another one?
>
>jeanette
>Meryem Marzouki wrote:
>>
>>Le 30 avr. 08 à 17:45, Avri Doria a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>>On 30 Apr 2008, at 11:35, Meryem Marzouki wrote:
>>>>compliant with out own charter.
>>>
>>>
>>>i do not see any way in which the nomcom was 
>>>non-compliant except perhaps that it did not 
>>>have a non voting chair who was separate from 
>>>the nomcom itself.  but since no one was 
>>>wiling to volunteer for this task (myself 
>>>included) I am not sure what else can be done.
>>
>>I don't see the absence of a non voting chair 
>>as an issue. We do what we can with our limited 
>>resources.
>>
>>>The rule about publishing the names and info 
>>>of candidates does not specify when it is 
>>>done, so as long as it is done before the 
>>>names are sent on and the nomcom blinks out of 
>>>existence, i do not understand what is missing.
>>
>>I don't see your point here. Whatever way one 
>>might understand when it is done (and note that 
>>the nomcom already published its results on 
>>this list), we have the precedent of the 
>>previous candidates selection.
>>
>>>It is all well and good if another  group 
>>>wishes to delay, I still recommend against it 
>>>for this caucus.  In fact I would recommend 
>>>against waiting for the announcement for that 
>>>group as well.
>>
>>Why?
>>
>>In any case, you just informed thus in the mean 
>>time that the deadline would be 21 May. This 
>>leaves us plenty of time to do what I've 
>>proposed. Let's see if there are other people 
>>against it, and what are their reasons - if we 
>>have some explanations, then we might at least 
>>understand why we shouldn't use this 
>>opportunity).
>>
>>Best,
>>Meryem
>>
>>____________________________________________________________
>>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>
>>For all list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
>To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
>For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance