[ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes

[Maureen Hilyard]

Evan and Alan have my agreement as well

Maureen

Maureen Hilyard, Cook Islands - Samsung Mobile

Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

>Sounds completely reasonable to me.
>
>Consider my proposal changed.
>
>Alan
>
>At 02/10/2014 12:44 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>>On 2 October 2014 11:08, Salanieta T. 
>>Tamanikaiwaimaro 
>><<mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> 
>>wrote:
>>Secret ballots on decertification are not transparent.
>>There should be utmost transparency involved in processes such as
>>decertification.
>>
>>
>>​On reflection, I have the following change of tack.
>>
>>I agree on open votes for Decertification 
>>because it is a serious​ act of 
>>disenfranchisement. By the time a vote comes up 
>>there must be compelling reason to do this, it must not be taken lightly.
>>
>>However, on certification, for better or worse 
>>some recent instances have become incredibly 
>>politicised, with even the RALO itself unable to 
>>properly advise the ALAC on a way to proceed. In 
>>these instances, I would prefer a closed vote 
>>that enables ALAC members to vote on the merits 
>>of the action rather than risk acrimony amongst 
>>people they will have to work with. As Alan has 
>>said, this is now close to the realm of a 
>>personal election, and IMO this is a specific 
>>instance in which privacy trumps transparency.
>>
>>So, on reflection, I suggest this:
>>    * Decertification votes are always open.
>>    * Certification votes are open UNLESS the 
>> RALO does not provide definitive advice. Then Alan's protocol applies.
>>- Evan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Alan Greenberg 
>><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
>>wrote:
>>
>> > On our last ALAC call, Olivier brought up the subject of whether ALS
>> > certification and decertification votes should use secret ballots (such as
>> > we used for personnel votes) or not, and it was decided to discuss the
>> > issue on the mailing list.
>> >
>> > The history is that most ALAC votes are open and it is disclosed who voted
>> > which way, with the exception of personnel votes and others that the ALAC
>> > explicitly decides should be secret. We have made such a decision of rare
>> > occasions. The only example I can recall is when we voted on whether to
>> > file objections to the .health new TLDs and we did so to avoid any
>> > harassment of ALAC members who voted for such objections.
>> >
>> > A couple of years ago, a change was made to certification and
>> > decertification votes to change them from open to closed because of one or
>> > more objections filed by applicants. There is also a concern that a
>> > rejected application could lead to harassment of those who rejected it, and
>> > a concern that people might not vote honestly if the result was public
>> > (similar to the reason for secret ballots on personnel votes).
>> >
>> > I think that this concern should be considered.
>> >
>> > However, under our rules and the ICANN Bylaws, ALS certification and
>> > decertification decisions may be appealed to the Board. As such, we should
>> > be in a position to explain why a decision was made.
>> >
>> > Accordingly I offer the following proposal.
>> >
>> > ALS certification votes shall be conducted in such a way that there will
>> > be no public disclosure of how ALAC Members voted. However, the details of
>> > how ALAC Members voted will be available to ICANN At-Large staff and the
>> > ALAC Chair to allow them to conduct private interviews with voters to be
>> > able to put together a rationale for why any particular decision was made.
>> >
>> > Comments?
>> >
>> > Alan
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ALAC mailing list
>> > <mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>> >
>> > At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>> > ALAC Working Wiki: 
>> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+
>> > Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>> >
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>
>>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>ALAC Working Wiki: 
>><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Evan Leibovitch
>>Toronto Canada
>>Em: evan at telly dot org
>>Sk: evanleibovitch
>>Tw: el56
>_______________________________________________
>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)
>