[ALAC] Rules of Procedure - Draft for discussion at 26 March ALAC meeting

Carlton Samuels carlton.samuels at gmail.com
Wed Mar 27 20:21:27 UTC 2013


See, now that you say it, it highlights the problem with the direct
suffrage model you prefer.  So we cannot get ALS representatives - them
voted by individual ALS members who know them best, mind you - to follow
thru on their commitments to represent.  Whatever we think that 'represent'
means in context.  The solution you proffer might just be it;  along the
lines of 'bypass them layabout suckers and speak to the laity directly'.

Ok.  So its one-person-in-ALS-one-vote; everybody gets a vote.  How do we
count the votes? Do we still go with the normalised vote that exist today -
meaning balanced for all regions - or a weighted vote?  And if we choose a
weighted vote approach, what is your favoured mechanism? Will the weight be
calculated by estimated Internet user per region? How about interest in
Internet policy matters? Monetary interests perhaps?  Inquiring mind wants
to know.

Allow me to be a little provocative for effect here. Say for example, the
case of an ALS in, oh lets say the AP Region. Given 'western' propaga..er,
concerns with 'free and fair and free from fear' voting in the several
countries, what would be your preferred approach thereabouts? Just for the
'organized legions' now.

Do we have a case for the franchise to users not connected to ALS? And if
so, what do we count of the dis[un]organized hordes?  How would we
recognize and count them in say, the Caribbean?  The whole of Africa?
 India? China? Those persons who are habitues in places deemed paid up
members of the axis-of-evil set?

For I could go with you down the road to popular franchise.  But only on
condition that all Internet users be afforded the right to vote.  Including
every last one of the estimated 500M Chinese Internet users.

You might even convince me that proxy voting be allowed.  Then all I would
ask for in return is first dibs on the 'right' pair of ears.........

-Carlton

==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================


On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

>
> On 27 Mar 2013, at 10:49, Carlton Samuels wrote:
>
> > Avri:
> > If your argument is that a voting event has a history of high
> participation then no contest. For in my region our fellas turn out to
> vote.  So to your own objective of 'direct' suffrage for Board directorship
> its a perfect solution.
> >
> > However, when you offer the abstraction that voting is in itself
> evidence of ALS enthusiasm for the ICANN policy development enterprise,
>  that would be a stretch bordering on the giddy.
>
> Not my point.
>
> My point is that voting is an essential ingredient to large scale
> enthusiasm and participation.
> It is necessary, but not sufficient.
>
> >  For after several rounds of voting events to choose our own leaders,
> the evidence of sustained enthusiasm for the follow-on nitty gritty policy
> work you more than most immerse yourself into is against you.  And I have 6
> years of evidence for which there is no successful contradiction.
> >
> > Why don't representatives show up and participate?  The plain answer is
> always the best one; they're not interested.  I start from some
> facts.....and a philosophical posture.   I abhor this default position of
> patronage so I will not patronize. To my certain knowledge there is not a
> single mouth breather or half wit among ALS representatives; all are likely
> in the top 2% of of their educated populations.  They are yet sentient
> beings. They know where they can keep track of what's happening. They know
> when something comes up that would interest and attract their active
> intervention.  They are aware of the several intervention models; telecons,
> lists, WGs etc. etc. The only rational explanation of non-involvement left
> open to me is labeled 'no interest'.
> >
>
> I am not one of the ALAS representive, so I cannot speak for their
> interest level. Or the reasons.
>
> One of the things I know as an ALS member of 2 ALS, is we see precious
> little of ICANN.  If I was only an ALS member, I might not know ICANN
> existed to be interested in. (i would put this in the fact category)
>
> So in addition to what I see as a necessary ingredient - needing to vote.
>  Another necessary ingredient is keeping them informed and using that as
> the hook to get them interested. (i would put  this in the we haven't tried
> it so I hope it will work category).
>
> Are these two sufficient, who knows.  But I have little doubt that they
> are necessary.
>
> avri
>
>
>
> > I stand to be corrected on the facts.
> >
> > - Carlton
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>



More information about the ALAC mailing list