[ALAC] Consensus Call: ALAC Liaisons for 2017-18

Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Wed Aug 16 16:39:01 UTC 2017

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Aug 16, 2017 5:02 PM, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

Answers embedded below.

At 16/08/2017 02:51 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:

Hello Alan,

Am not sure I understand why we will be selecting more than 1 person for
Maureen to mentor since only one person will serve as replacement of her.
Selecting more than 1 will also make travel difficult to allocate.

We may not select more than 1, but that will depend on the people who put
their names forward. We don't want to waste people's time or other
resources, but it may not be obvious at the start who the best candidate
is. If there is more than one, travel could be an issue (depending on
whether the person is already funded or not) and that will surely be a
consideration, but only one of them.

SO: Yes I agree travel will be just one of the issue that may occur and
it's the reason why this should be a one to one thing. It should not be a
competition like scenario where we then start looking at who to select
among 1+ mentees. Having just one mentee helps the person focus without
doubt of being the Liaison after Maureen and it will somewhat reduce the
workload of Maureen as well (even though I know she is a super woman)

Secondly I think it's important to be clear from start the maximum number
of months that this mentorship will take so whoever is selected will be
able to assume his/her role.

My personal opinion is it will be several months, covering at least one and
perhaps two ICANN meetings.

SO: Certainly the upcoming meeting is out of scope.

on of the replacement will be done by/before Abu dhabi so those that were
selected will then have the opportunity to start attending next ICANN

I am optimistic that we will have completed out initial selection for the
SSAC prior to Abu Dhabi. I cannot address whether the SSAC Membership
Committee and the SSAC will have completed their part by then.

For the ccNSO, it is pretty clear it will not be done by then.

If we really though that these selections could be made before the meeting,
there would be no need to reappoint Maureen and Julie on an interim basis.

SO: I am more about ensuring that the mentees have the opportunity to
attend the next meeting (in 2018) after AbuDhabi.

Overall these comments are in no way an indication of disagreement on the
appointments proposed but just highlighting some "will be good to have"



Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Aug 16, 2017 3:51 AM, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca > wrote:
Following consultation with ALAC Members and with our current Liaisons,
this is Consensus Call on how to address our Liaisons to the GNSO, ccNSO,
SSAC and GAC for the year beginning at the end of ICANN60 to be held in Abu

Our current Liaisons are:

GNSO: Cheryl Langdon-Orr
GAC: Yrjö Länsipuro
ccNSO: Maureen Hilyard
SSAC: Julie Hammer

All four are serving the ALAC well. Cheryl and Yrjö, both having served
just one term (plus several months for Yrjö) and have agreed, with the
support of the ALAC, to continue in their roles. Maureen and Julie have
both indicated that they wish to step down from their Liaison roles. In the
case of the ccNSO, we expect the identification and training of a
replacement to take a significant number of months, during which time
Maureen will stay on as Liaison. In the case of the SSAC, as Julie will
become the new Vice-Chair of the SSAC in January, she would like to step
down as soon as practical, but has agreed to serve for the first months of
the ICANN year if a replacement has not been named by then.

In all four cases and in accordance with ALAC RoP 18.2 (See
http://tinyurl.com/ALAC-RoP-2016-09 and reproduced at the end of this
message), I am proposing that the ALAC re-appoint the current Liaisons.

In parallel with this we will also begin the process of identifying a
replacement for both Maureen and Julie.


A set of qualifications will be assembled and a call will be issued for
volunteers interested in serving as the ALAC Liaison to the ccNSO.
Depending on the number of candidates, either Maureen will work with the
candidates (with the permission of the ccNSO) and ultimately makes a
recommendation or set of recommendations on the future ccNSO Liaison. If
there are too many candidates, the ALAC Appointee Selection Committee
(AASC) working with Maureen will select a sub-set for Maureen to mentor.
This process will continue into the coming year, but the success we had
with a similar process last time there was a change in ccNSO Liaison
indicates that it is worth the time and effort.


A set of qualifications will be assembled and a call will be issued for
volunteers. The list of candidates will go to the AASC who, with Julie's
assistance, will select no more than two potential candidates. Those
selected will be forwarded to the SSAC (ratified by the ALAC). If the SSAC
decides to admit one person to the SSAC, that person is our SSAC Liaison.
If the SSAC selects more than one, this subset of people returns the AASC
for final selection. Due to the number of steps and the requirement for the
SSAC Membership Committee and the SSAC to meet, this may or may not happen
prior to the end of ICANN60.

With this message, I am initiating a Consensus Call of the ALAC to ratify
the above recommendations.

This Consensus Call will end at 23:59 UTC on Monday, 21 August 2017.

If there are any questions of comments, please direct them to either this
list or to me directly.

Although messages indicating support are welcome, they are not necessary.
This Consensus Call will be deemed to have succeeded in the absence of
significant opposition (greater than 20% as specified by ALAC RoP



ALAC Rules of Procedure

18.1 Appointments of At-Large Appointees to various bodies both inside and
outside of ICANN will be made by the ALAC. Such appointments will normally
be initiated by a call for volunteers, posted by the Chair/Staff to the
Approved Distribution Lists, and on other lists if appropriate, allowing at
least seven days for people to volunteer. The decision regarding
appointments is typically made via Consensus. However, the Chair will
initiate a secret ballot to determine which candidate is to be appointed if
Consensus cannot be reached or if this is requested by any ALAC Member.

18.2 By the decision of the ALAC, a current Appointee who is willing to
continue in that role may be reconfirmed instead of initiating a new
selection process.

18.3 In the case of selections requiring complex criteria evaluation, the
ALAC may choose to form a sub-committee to carry out the analysis and to
make recommendations to the ALAC based on that analysis.

18.4 For situations where the ALAC is not empowered to make appointments
but rather to endorse one or more candidates, essentially the same process
as described here for appointments should be used, but with the outcome
being an endorsement.

ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: 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/20170816/3bdbc3d2/attachment.html>

More information about the ALAC mailing list