[ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes

[Tijani BENJEMAA]

Dear Alan,

 

Unfortunately, I didn’t attend the last ALAC call. I do appreciate that this
issue was brought to the table.

 

I do think that the ALS certification and decertification votes should be
conducted as confidential votes to avoid any tension or harassment. Even
staff and the ALAC chair shouldn’t know how ALAC Members voted. We may ask
voters to give the rational of their vote, but anonymously.

 

My fear is that when the ALAC members cast their votes knowing that there
will be someone (staff and ALAC Chair) who will see how they voted, they
will not vote according to their conscience, they will modulate their choice
according the relationship they think staff members and ALAC Chair have with
the concerned ALS.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

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 : jeudi 2 octobre 2014 14:37
À : ALAC
Objet : [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes

 

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

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+(ALA
C)



---
Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active.
http://www.avast.com