[Euro-board] Seeking EURALO Board advice on Proxies

[Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond]

Dear Roberto,

thank you for your suggestions. They sound fine.
Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 21/11/2019 15:11, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> I agree but…
>
> For sure I cannot see on the agenda of our AGM topics that could push folks to spoof proxies to get the majority on a possible vote, so I accept the cool approach. Moreover, if I remember correctly, we have a limit of two proxies to be accepted by each member present to the meeting, so I am fine.
> For clarification, do we accept proxies only to members physically present or also to members attending by teleconference?
>
> However, my paranoiac half - or even 2/3, as you do not work for 13 years at the IAEA Safeguards without being affected - suggests two safeguard measures:
> - make sure that we keep in its integrity the proxy email, so that an audit on the headers could be performed should problem arise
> - staff sends a brand new message (not a reply-to to the proxy email) to the official email address of the representatives of the ALS giving and taking the proxy confirming the recording of the proxy
>
> This should not be too heavy a burden for staff, I assume.
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
>
>
>
>> On 21.11.2019, at 00:07, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> as you know we are not running on the New EURALO Bylaws. The rule for
>> Proxies is as follows:
>>
>> 8.2.1.3. Proxies may only validly be appointed by a notice in writing (a
>> “proxy notice”) which:
>>
>> a. states the name and address of the Member appointing the proxy;
>> b. identifies the person appointed to be that Member’s proxy and the
>> General Assembly in relation to which that person is appointed;
>> c. is signed by or on behalf of the Member appointing the proxy, or is
>> authenticated in such manner as the Board may determine; and is
>> delivered to the General Assembly in accordance with the articles and
>> any instructions contained in the notice of the General Assembly to
>> which they relate.
>>
>> Sébastien and I have discussed this and the form of a proxy should
>> really be in the operational rules, but in the absence of such rules at
>> the present moment, we interpreted the Proxy rules as:
>>
>> - the name and address of the member appointing the proxy is the name
>> and the email address. We have always taken the email address as being
>> authoritative
>>
>> - It is our opinion that an email from the member, that clearly provides
>> the name of the proxy they are nominating, is enough authentication for
>> the appointment of a proxy. We are in a non-hostile environment and at
>> this stage we cannot foresee that someone might forge emails to appoint
>> proxies without the authority to do so.
>>
>> Please confirm that this interpretation is supported by you.
>> Kindest regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Euro-board mailing list
>> Euro-board at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-board
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html