[ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation

Wed May 28 19:47:39 UTC 2014

Hello all,

my suggestion was for Alan's Statement to be the first draft (slightly
amended to reflect that it is an ALAC Statement) & for everyone to
comment on Alan's first draft. Using usual methods, a second & final
draft could then be produced, based on the feedback given on the page.
Kind regards,

Olivier

On 28/05/2014 18:57, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> What I thought Olivier saidwas that I would post my original statement
> to the wiki, and then based on the other input, the ALAC would either
> support the statement or would create a different statement of its own.
>
> If the former is chosen, I can certain draft the "The ALAC supports
> Alan's statement".
>
> If it is to be different, then that is not in my court - I already
> said what I think was important.
>
> Maybe I got it wrong. Olivier??
>
> Alan
>
> At 28/05/2014 12:49 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>> Dear Alan,
>>
>> What I understood from yesterday’s call is that you make a first
>> draft (on the wiki) not on your behalf, but on behalf of ALAC, and
>> people comment. If there is consensus, ALAC will send it as ALAC
>> position. Am I wrong?
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Tijani BEN JEMAA
>> Executive Director
>> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
>> Phone: + 216 41 649 605
>> Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
>> Fax: + 216 70 853 376
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> [mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan
>> Greenberg
>> Envoyé : mardi 27 mai 2014 16:59
>> À : ALAC Working List
>> Objet : [ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation
>>
>> Regarding:
>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-en
>>
>>
>> As discussed on the ALAC call today, I will be posting the following
>> statement (subject to minor editing) to the ICANN Public Comment.
>>
>> I encourage anyone who supports this to submit a comment to
>> <mailto:comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14 at icann.org>Submit
>> Comment to Forum. I also understand that the ALAC is itself may
>> submit a statement as well (either support or a separate statement).
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> I am a member of the ALAC and the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, but I am
>> making this comment purely in my own capacity.
>>
>> I believe that, subject to a number of related considerations, it is
>> reasonable to compensate Board members, including Liaisons, and the
>> level of compensation suggested is reasonable.
>>
>> I do note that in the name of simplification, the report suggests an
>> increase for Board members who are not Board Committee Chairs by as
>> much as 29%.
>>
>> However, the related considerations mentioned above, in my mind,
>> cannot be ignored.
>>
>> - One of the reasons always sited for such compensation is that
>> having no compensation limits the available candidates who will make
>> themselves available for the ICANN Board. Given that there has never
>> been an AC/SO seat vacant due to lack of candidates, there is often
>> competition for such seats, and the Nominating Committee regularly
>> says that it has had to make very difficult decisions in selecting
>> Board members since there was a surplus of eminently qualified
>> candidates, in the name of transparency and accountability, it would
>> be good to see hard evidence of the rationale.
>>
>> - The introduction of Board compensation widened the gulf between
>> Board members and other volunteers within ICANN. The proposed change
>> widens that gulf further. There is no question that many Board
>> members work very hard on behalf of ICANN, and that dedication eats
>> into their other professional activities and personal life. However,
>> the same can be said for many ICANN volunteers. There are many in the
>> community who work equally hard and dedicate the same kind of hours
>> as Board members. Indeed, it has been claimed that many in the
>> community put in far more time and effort than some Board members. I
>> believe that this claim is accurate.
>>
>> SO and AC Chairs have been identified as meeting the above levels of
>> commitment, and indeed many or perhaps all do. However, there are
>> others who do not receive the existing benefits given to Board
>> members and AC/SO Chairs who also dedicate unending hours and effort
>> to ICANN.
>>
>> Board and now Liaison compensation without any new consideration of
>> the contributions of others denigrates the efforts of the rest of the
>> ICANN volunteers. Such acknowledgment for non-Chairs need not be
>> financial compensation - there are a host of other benefits that
>> Board members get that other volunteers (and Chairs) would really
>> appreciate.
>>
>> Although I understand the difficulty of identifying those who put
>> Herculean efforts into ICANN from those who are lower level
>> contributors, we cannot continue to widen the gulf between the
>> privileged few and the rest of volunteers and expect there not to be
>> repercussions.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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)
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------
>> Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel
>> malveillant parce que la protection <http://www.avast.com/>Antivirus
>> avast! est active.
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>