This means that, despite the overall support of the SGs for a
solution which
was also inline with what the NCAs wanted themselves, we opt for the
solution that suits only one SG. Hardly seems fair.
I really think we should try and honour the NCAs' wishes if we can,
and the
proposed option 1 did that.
There is majority support for this. Does it have to be unanimous
support?
Stéphane
Le 15/10/09 09:32, « Avri Doria » <avri@xxxxxxx> a écrit :
Hi,
Since it does not appear that the 4 SGs managed to negotiate to a
common acceptable position on the placement of the NCA appointees,
and
given that a week has passed since the meeting and the decision to
give the council a week to try and find another acceptable solution
to
the lottery, I believe that we are now in the position of accepting
the results of the lottery and allowing the 3 NCAs to start
participating with their houses on the decisions concerning
candidates
for the chair position.
Thus, the NCA are allocated according to the following list as
determined by the lottery:
Terry Davis - Contracted Parties House
Olga Cavalli - Non Contracted Parties House
Andrei Kolesnikov - Non Voting Seat
I will be writing up the process followed and notifying the Board and
the Nomcom leadership of these results later today.
Thank you.
a.