[ALAC] ALAC Rule of Procedure for Selecting Director

Sun Aug 22 07:45:02 UTC 2010

Alan, I don't agree we are facing an either or situation: we do not 
have to choose between having a voting director and liaison, we can 
and should argue for both.

That there will be a voting director for at large is certain, the 
board will not go back on that decision now.  But the liaison 
position is not gone and trying to keep it is important to the future 
of ALAC's ability to provide advice to the board and community. 
Unlike the supporting organizations, and even GAC, the bylaws do not 
require ICANN to take At Large's advice. The new director can 
certainly represent user interests, but we know they cannot be our 
representative on the board.

Suggest that the bylaws amendments you have drafted go forward, 
except that we do not accept the sections deleting the liaison.  We 
can provide text to explain why (I've written some before on this 
list.)

In addition to weakening At Large/ALAC's ability to provide 
advice/recommendations to the board, if we loose the board advisory 
role the supporting organizations we currently have liaisons with may 
re-consider those relationships.  I know some constituencies have 
already mentioned this.

And I think it's mistaken to think that once the at large director is 
in place we can return to arguing for the (then lost) liaison role 
and even the second director position the At Large review 
recommended. The board will consider that part of the review done, I 
can't see them reopening the process. Won't happen, at least not 
until the next review, many years from now.

I think it's important the RALOs discuss this and come back with advice.

Adam

>Well, the Board resolution on which this is all based was very clear
>about replacing the Liaison with the voting Board member. If our
>intent is to turn back the clock and go back to just a Liaison (as
>some people indeed feel would be best and have since the start of
>these discussions), then this is a good time to raise the issue. If
>we really want the voting Board member, then my inclination is to get
>that put in place and then based on experience, try to argue for
>putting  back the Liaison (presumably instead of a second voting 
>Board member).
>
>I just don't see how we could get both at the same time at this
>moment. There are certainly some Board members who want to see the
>voting position go forward, and no doubt some who would prefer the
>status quo. I don't think there are many who would buy one voting and
>one liaison at this time.
>
>It's not a perfect situation, but that is how I read things. We need
>to make up our minds which is more important and go for it.
>
>My personal opinion is that At-Large would be better served by a
>Liaison, but that Internet user community is better served by a good
>voting Board member.
>
>Alan
>
>At 21/08/2010 08:25 PM, Hong Xue wrote:
>
>>Thanks to Alan for the comprehensive comments. Another issue that
>>has been raised in Brussels but not sufficiently discussed ever
>>since is whether we want to advocate to keep the Board liaison along
>>with the selected At-Large Board Member. To my memory, draft bylaws
>>replace the liaison with the Board member. We may wish to comment on
>>this specific point as well.
>>
>>Hong
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Alan Greenberg
>><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>While drafting my comments on the draft Bylaws associated with the
>>At-Large Director, I realized that we will need to formally put our
>>selection procedures into the ALAC Rules of Procedure (RoP).
>>
>>I have done a first draft which can be found at
>><https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?draft_rule_27>https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?draft_rule_27.
>>I am also attaching a PDF version for your convenience.
>>
>>The current RoP (Rev10) is pointed to at
>><https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?rules_of_procedure>https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?rules_of_procedure.
>>
>>The new draft rule includes Rationale's for some of the sub-rules.
>>These rationales would not be part of the final rule, but are there
>  >to explain what I am proposing.
>>
>>With a few exceptions, the draft corresponds to the process that has
>>been agreed upon and has been given to the Board SIC. They are
>>specified in general terms, to allow the process to be refined based
>>on what we learn during this current process, and without having to
>>formally alter the RoP each time.
>>
>>There are two new parts that I am suggesting.
>>
>>First, although we have had some general discussions about proxy
>>voting, we have never agreed on any rules, and we never discussed
>>this in the context of the At-Large Director selection process. I am
>>suggesting that we allow proxies *IF* we come up with some general
>>rules (applicable for all votes) or if we develop some for the
>>Director selection process only. Essentially this rule says that
>>proxies are allowed *IF* we define exactly how they will work. If we
>>do this, it will ensure that we do not disenfranchise some RALOs.
>>
>>Second, our voting methodology said that we will use random
>>selection in the case of a tie. I think that it would be a really
>>poor outcome if we end up selecting our Director by a random
>>selection. I am proposing that if there is a tie, that the vote can
>>be held a second time which would allow some voters to alter their
>>vote. This *may* reduce the need for random selection.
>>
>>I am suggesting that we discuss this on the list and schedule a vote
>>for the next ALAC meeting. I suggest that staff take any messages
>>posted to the list and add them as comments to the wiki. If we
>>cannot come to closure in the remaining time, the vote could be
>>delayed, but it is important that we have the rule in place sometime
>>in the near future.
>>
>>To adopt a new rule or change existing rules, it takes a 2/3 vote of
>>all ALAC members who are voting in that ballot.
>>
>>I look forward to hearing comments on this.
>>
>>Alan
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>ALAC Working Wiki: <http://st.icann.org/alac>http://st.icann.org/alac
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Dr. Hong Xue
>>Professor of Law
>>Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
>>Beijing Normal University
>><http://iipl.org.cn/>http://iipl.org.cn/
>>19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
>>Beijing 100875 China
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac