[ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes

[Evan Leibovitch]

Thanks for the support of those who liked my approach.

For those still concerned by its potential harm to transparency, I
completely understand the concern. In response, I can recall fewer than
five instances, ever, in which the RALO advice has been undecided (out of
more than 180 ALSs approved to date). I foresee the vast majority of future
ALS applications continuing to be accompanied by unambiguous RALO advice,
for or against -- in which case, under my proposal, the ALAC certification
vote will remain open.

I believe that Alan's proposal of a vote closed to all but chair and staff,
in those VERY RARE cases where RALO advice is conflicted, is a reasonable
but necessary balance between accountability and conflict avoidance,


On 2 October 2014 16:51, Tijani BENJEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn> wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>



-- 
Evan Leibovitch
Toronto Canada

Em: evan at telly dot org
Sk: evanleibovitch
Tw: el56