[ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Fri Oct 3 15:42:53 UTC 2014

Evan, my apologies, it is how I read your suggestion.

You are saying that your suggestion for for 2 would be:

2. We have general agreement that for 
certification votes where there is definitive 
regional advice, we should have standard open 
votes. For cases where there is not definitive 
regional advice, how ALAC members vote should not be published.

Is that correct. If so, I have no problem with that.

Given the timing with some people leaving for LA 
in a few days, I suggest that we continue to 
solicit support or disagreement here and come to 
a resolution (hopefully quickly) in LA.


At 03/10/2014 11:24 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

>I'm not sure that summary is accurate.
>Based on my proposal ​-- with which you (Alan) 
>and many others agreed -- is that in the vast 
>majority of cases where the RALO advice is 
>clear, the ALAC certification vote remains open. 
>That is the opposite of what you have in point #2 above.
>Based on the emails to date, only Tijani has 
>expressed the view that all certification votes 
>should be closed. There is certainly NOT general 
>agreement on that, I oppose it myself. Indeed, 
>some (including myself and Raf) understand that 
>my proposal -- to close the votes *only* for 
>those ALS applications for which RALO advice is 
>conflicted -- is a difficult compromise, since 
>the preference is to be totally open.
>- Evan
>On 3 October 2014 10:56, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>Tijani, I understand. As I previously said, if 
>>there is support for your position, we probably 
>>need to make sure it is acceptable in case there is a dispute.
>>1. We have general agreement that 
>>de-certification votes should be standard open votes.
>>2. We have general agreement that how ALAC 
>>members vote on certification motions should not be published.
>>3. We have some level of agreement that in the 
>>case of a dispute, staff and Chair can access 
>>the details of how people voted to allow a 
>>summary statement to be created on why the 
>>request for accreditation did not succeed. 
>>However, there is some disagreement with this.

More information about the ALAC mailing list