[At-Large] ICANN Board Nomination
evan at telly.org
Sat Aug 21 15:01:22 UTC 2010
On 21 August 2010 10:12, Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa at topnet.tn> wrote:
> I know that you are one of those that have always defended non-English
> speakers. But here I am not understanding you very well.
> 1- we are not here speaking about gender nor racial nor diversity on other
> basis rather the first and more important element imposed by the bylaws
> which the regional balance.
That is a worthy mandate imposed on ICANN itself, but not specifically on
At-Large. The NomCom has an obligation to ensure regional balance, and it is
able to select many Directors in order to achieve that balance.
By contrast, At-Large can only choose one, fully independent of the
diversity initiatives which the NomCom must already consider. We cannot be
making our decision of Board representative while (at the same time)
worrying if we must correct what might be perceived as a deficiency of
diversity in the NomComm selections.
> 2- I don't consider the regional balance as "Lux" but it is "vital"
I am in complete agreement that it is vital for the ICANN Board as a whole,
but it is a luxury for the single solitary selection that At-Large is forced
> 3- I am sure that you agree that there is may be someone in "Less
> Considered Regions" the "Best possible advocate".
Of that, I have no doubt at all.
I am saying that being the "best possible advocate" must be the primary
criterion (and maybe even the only one for this first selection), regardless
of where the candidate lives.
I have seen many "non insider" new board member appointed by NomCom
> becoming very strong board members.
I agree. Indeed, I am hoping that some very worthy people step forward to be
considered. (Usually the NomnComm receives many many applications for Board
positions. I wonder how many of them might be suitable as an At-Large
However I am (strongly) against the notion that we eliminate from
consideration (either procedurally or mentally) people who have a record of
work as an ICANN volunteer simply because of that involvement. If anything,
an ICANN history offers a relatively easy way to verify a nominee's claim of
being worthy for the role. Such an open history could even work against
someone's candidacy -- but it must not disqualify them.
More information about the At-Large