2025-01-27 GNSO Standing Selection Committee

Notes/ Action Items

Notes and Action Items

SSC Meeting (Latin Script Diacritics PDP WG Chair candidate evaluation) on Monday, 27 January 2025, at 20:00 UTC

[Action Items]

• GNSO Support Staff to send a Consensus Call email to the SSC list with the preliminary decision to put forward Michael Bauland as the Latin Script Diacritics PDP WG Chair and ask for non-objection in 48 hours.
• GNSO Support Staff to circulate the SSC Charter to the Team mailing list, requesting input on what items should be addressed for discussion.

[Notes]

1.Welcome and SOI updates

- N/A

2.Selection Process for Chair of Latin Diacritics PDP Working Group:

     a) Review of Poll Results

• Overview of survey results provided by Staff (Saewon Lee) to the Team; The results were also shared with the Team via email prior to the call: https://lists.icann.org/hyperkitty/list/gnso-ssc@icann.org/thread/SBJPZPFPGEULWPL5H26X2S57D5VDU4IQ/ [lists.icann.org]
• There were 2 candidates: 1) Mark Datysgeld; 2) Michael Bauland
• The survey tool received all 9 responses from the SSC members; but the tool is only a guide, providing perspective and more context, to facilitate the discussions, not to make a determination.
• The survey results presented the ranking in order as follows: 1) Michael Bauland; 2) Mark Datysgeld.

     b) Discussion and Selection of Candidate

• Qu) Julf Helsingius asked 2 questions about the survey process:

1) Has the sharing of the individual responses, including the names of the respondents, been protocol?

 Karen Day, as the SSC Chair, responded that the decision was made under leadership discretion to provide an additional layer of transparency and provide full context to the outcome. After previous calls, the Chair believed that members owning to their comments also helped with the discussions.

2) The survey deadline was extended by 2 hours. Is this also protocol and if so, doesn’t it diminish the importance of a deadline?

 Karen also explained that Staff made the call to receive more responses and re-emphasized the meaning of this survey tool – a mechanism to help with the discussions during the meeting; Staff also added that in previous cases, the deadlines were extended due to low responses from the members to receive more input that would help with the discussion, if it made sense and time was sufficient to review the results prior to the meeting.

• Segunfunmi Olajide questioned the mechanism and its results, which ultimately serve as a basis to reach consensus.

 Karen opened the floor for any objections to be raised, and if necessary, requested the members to also provide them through the Consensus Call after the meeting.

• Several members, including Karen Day, supported the poll result, putting forward Michael Bauland as the Chair for the Latin Script Diacritics PDP WG.

 3.Next Steps

     a.48-hour Consensus Call

• Desiree Miloshevic asked about the next steps: Karen, as SSC Chair, requested Staff to issue a Consensus Call email to the SSC list with the preliminary decision to put forward Michael Bauland as the Latin Script Diacritics PDP WG Chair, and ask for non-objection in 48 hours (~29 January).
• Staff again mentioned that there is another opportunity after the call to weigh in if there are any objections to schedule another meeting and repeat the process.

*Action Item: GNSO Support Staff to send a Consensus Call email to the SSC list with the preliminary decision to put forward Michael Bauland as the Chair of the Latin Script Diacritics PDP WG, and ask for non-objection in 48 hours. (~29 January).

     b.Motion to GNSO Council on 03 February for 13 February Meeting

• If no objections, a motion will proceed for the GNSO Council to vote at the 13 February Council Meeting.

 4.Possible New Work: Periodic Review of SSC Charter

• Wiki page for SSC Charter: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/GSSC/pages/97584059/2.+Charter
• The possibility to revise the Charter is stated in the document as follows: “The SSC may request from the GNSO Council a review of the Charter annually or if the members identify a need for a specific review.”
• Through this process, new mechanisms for the selection process could be discussed as well as the Ombuds process, if appropriate, as suggested in the last meeting.
• Pedro Lana supported this opportunity, albeit providing no specific suggestions at this present time.
• Karen suggested that the Charter should be circulated with the Team via the mailing list, notifying them to review the document and providing on the mailing list items to be addressed for future discussions.
• The Team noted that there are no further meetings/selection processes scheduled at this present time.

*Action Item: GNSO Support Staff to circulate the SSC Charter to the Team mailing list, requesting input on what items should be addressed for discussion.

5.AOB    

  - N/A