[ALAC] ALAC Working Methods - Was: Endorsements: Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team

Wed Nov 25 17:05:22 UTC 2015

I now think I understand the issue here, and it 
is indeed an issue of how the ALAC works.

In Dublin, there was a discussion of how to 
endorse the candidates, and I, in this original 
e-mail, laid out that path, saying the how the 
endorsement group would be composed, suggesting 
that it be delegated the responsibility to 
formally endorse without reverting to the ALAC, 
and asking ALAC Members and RALO leadership to identify the people.

You (Seun) disagreed with the delegation part. I 
explained by I thought that this was not needed 
but said we would see what other people thought, 
and you suggested that instead we use the entire 
ALAC to do the endorsement. No one else commented 
on either your original objection or your new suggestion.

The ALAC, to the extent possible, works by 
consensus. That applies not only to formal 
suggestions, but to discussions in general. 
Consensus is not formally "defined", but our 
Rules of Procedure say "12.1.3.1 As a “rule of 
thumb”, Consensus is no less than 80% of the 
sitting ALAC Members". So if only 1 or 2 ALAC 
members disagree with something, we can still 
claim to have consensus. with 3/15 (20%), it is 
right on the line and I would probably not 
declare a consensus is in that case. In the case 
at hand, one person disagreed. That should not be 
ignored (and I did explain why I disagreed), and 
no one else supported your position. So I felt 
that there was a strong (but not unanimous) consensus to proceed with the plan.

Hopefully this particular case, and our general methodology is now clear.

Alan

At 24/11/2015 03:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:

>Hello Alan,
>
>Just for the record, here is the follow-up mail 
>I sent to the list and I also sent you a private 
>follow-up message when I did not hear from you 
>Alan (both of which did not receive a response).
>
>There was discussion on item 1 of what you said 
>you required and there was no indication on 
>whether item 2 and 3 was in effect so I wrote 
>requesting confirmation of that. This could also 
>be an issue with me getting used to how ALAC 
>operates but perhaps your response would have helped.
>
>For the record, AFRALO would have organised her 
>nominations just that we(I) thought there was 
>still discussion on item 1 and that item 2 and 3 was pending.
>
>Regards
>Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>On 18 Nov 2015 13:01, "Seun Ojedeji" 
><<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Hello Alan,
>
>Can you confirm if your proposal for 1 
>nomination each at ALAC and RALO level 
>respectively is now in effect? so regions can 
>organise. Will be good to know the deadline for the nomination.
>
>Regards
>
>Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>On 18 Nov 2015 00:59, "Alan Greenberg" 
><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>There is no formal rule against endorsing 
>candidates who did not identify ALAC in the 
>application. However, I see little merit in 
>evaluating all 72 applications, and for the 
>reasons that Cheryl, outlines, I do not think it 
>proper for us to unilaterally "adopt" a candidate.
>
>If you know of someone who you think we should 
>consider, please let me know and I will contact them privately.
>
>Alan
>
>At 17/11/2015 12:50 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>That is a good idea, but I would prefer to do 
>this endorsement and then establish the rules 
>associated with the group's ongoing task. There 
>is not enough time to do that properly and have 
>it formally sanctioned by the ALAC and then get this endorsement carried out.
>
>Regarding selection of candidates who did not 
>identify ALAC of a target group. Good question. I will look into it.
>
>Alan
>
>At 17/11/2015 02:39 AM, SÃ©bastien Bachollet wrote:
>Thanks Alan for putting the proposal together,
>I support your proposal.
>It is important that we embarque in this choice both ALAC and the Ralos.
>
>However, can we have this group set-up for one year and to be in charge of
>all the endorsements during that year?
>
>One question: Can we support people even if they didnÂ¹t ask for ALAC
>endorsement?
>
>All the best
>
>
>Skills are useful but diversity is essential.
>
>SÃ©bastien Bachollet
><tel:%2B33%206%2007%2066%2089%2033>+33 6 07 66 89 33
>Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/>http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/
>Mail: SÃ©bastien Bachollet 
><<mailto:sebastien at bachollet.com>sebastien at bachollet.com>
>
>
>
>
>Le 17/11/2015 03:12, Â« Alan Greenberg Â»
><<mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
>on behalf of
><mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> a Ã©crit :
>
> >In Dublin I suggested that the ALT recommend who to endorse for the
> >Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team and there
> >was a strong feeling within the ALAC that this responsibility not be
> >given to the ALT. The applicants have now been announced and we need
> >to decide who to endorse
> >-<https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/c 
> ct/applications>https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications.
> >
> >I suggest that we use the same composition for the selection team as
> >we have for a number of other recent groups, for each region, one
> >ALAC Member selected by the Members from that region, and one person
> >selected by the RALO leadership. No one who has submitted an
> >application is eligible to serve of the endorsement group. All team
> >members will need to:
> >
> >- Be familiar with the purpose of the Review
> >(<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-vo 
> lunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-volunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e
> >n).
> >- Review the Applications.
> >- Prepare a brief evaluation of each candidate (details to be provided).
> >
> >Endorsements are due no later than 14 December.
> >
> >Nine people indicated that they were seeking ALAC endorsements, five
> >seeking only an ALAC endorsement, and four list multiple alternatives.
> >
> >I am happy to have the ALAC delegate the endorsements to this group,
> >and if the ALAC agrees, there will be no need for the ALAC to ratify
> >the endorsements.
> >
> >We will be scheduling the first (and possibly only) meeting of the
> >group for the week on November 30th, so please submit names within
> >the next week to ensure that we can select a suitable time for the
> >meeting.
> >
> >To be clear, I am looking for:
> >
> >1. Any objections to having the group make the endorsements without
> >further ALAC action.
> >
> >2. The name of the ALAC member from each region to participate in the
> >endorsement process.
> >
> >3. The name of the regional appointee from each region to participate
> >in the endorsement process.
> >
> >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+Advisory+Committee+(A>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A
> >LAC)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20151125/b5ec2a00/attachment.html>