[At-Large] Board liaison - more changes

[Jose Ovidio Salgueiro A.]

What happened with LAC RALO was an internal matter that was innecesarily made public and I don`t think it should be discussed any further




José Ovidio Salgueiro A.
jsalgueiro at cantv.net



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Vittorio Bertola 
  To: jam at jacquelinemorris.com 
  Cc: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
  Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 3:39 PM
  Subject: Re: [At-Large] Board liaison - more changes


  Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
  > Hi
  > 
  > With the rapid changes of the agenda here in San Juan, and the concept 
  > of unfairness to the RALOs that are not physically present in San Juan – 
  > they need to have similar access.
  > 
  > So we will set up a teleconference that we will advertise in good time, 
  > we will have time for questions, etc.

  May I put on the record that I find this wrong, and also unfair?

  I have been waiting for the entire week to have a chance for a frank 
  discussion with the Committee about my nomination and the others. I have 
  refrained from going around and doing a lot of campaigning, first of all 
  because I think that the entire way we are thinking of this process is 
  wrong and we should make it a productive discussion about who of us is 
  best suited, rather than a beauty contest in which members of the 
  Committee are pushed to please this or that other person at their 
  request. And then, also because, as the current liaison, I am required 
  to be in several additional meetings and have scarce opportunities to 
  socialize or exchange views outside of our planned meetings.

  There are several members of the Committee, including some who joined 
  just recently, with whom, differently from the other candidates, I have 
  had no chance to exchange any opinion or explain what I think, and I do 
  not think that a teleconference is a valid substitute for face to face 
  discussion.

  Also, I am extremely concerned by the prospect of this going on for more 
  time, possibly weeks. I am afraid that this would bring just more 
  behind-the-scenes discussions and pressures for people to keep or change 
  their opinion. I am already displeased by what happened in the LACRALO 
  and I am afraid that this could bring more heated discussions in other 
  RALOs, and in the end put the cohesion of our group and our entire 
  constituency at risk, for a single appointment that is important, but 
  less important than all the hot policy issues we have on the agenda. A 
  lot of important policy decisions will be made this summer, and we 
  should be working on them, not on appointments.

  I think that it would be a serious problem for me to be a "sub judice" 
  liaison for several weeks. If most people think that there is the need 
  for a change, let's just do it. By dragging this forward (and by the 
  way, this would violate a good number of the rules of procedure that 
  have taken us six months to agree, exactly because we did not want to 
  have procedural discussions again), it would look like we cannot conduct 
  our normal business in a serious manner, and this would damage the 
  entire Committee.

  Thanks,
  -- 
  vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
  -------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------

  _______________________________________________
  ALAC mailing list
  ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
  http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

  At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org
  ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070628/67b204e4/attachment.html