[EURO-Discuss] ALAC Candidates

[Annette Muehlberg]

Dear Patrick, dear all,

FYI: In January, there was a public announcement:

"ICANN At-Large Advisory Committee Announces Vacancy
Volunteer Needed From Europe for the interim period of time until 
European Regional At-Large Organisation is set up
**Individuals from these regions interested in serving on the ALAC are 
encouraged to contact the Committee by 16th January 2007.**
ICANN's Board will appoint an individual from Europe to fill this 
vacancy, after receiving recommendation from the ALAC.
..."

Statements of interest were sent to the ALAC and of course the ALAC 
discussed incoming statements...(and finally decided to postpone and 
delegate to the EURALO).

What I pointed out, is that at that time we were not aware of a request 
for ALS membership of candidates and it was neither mentioned as a 
request in the public announcement itself.

All I am saying: We were not aware of that fact and I must have 
overlooked that line in the MOU. And I did so because I did not expect 
it there. And I did not expect it, because I consider it to be 
unnecessary. I think that the rule we have chosen for EURALO board 
members is absolutely sufficent.

And obviously the representative from the accredited ALS "Medienstadt 
Leipzig" who nominated the lady from Moldova shared this unawareness ;-)

But we do not have to talk about this anymore concerning the current 
procedure, because the respective candidate already became a member of 
an european ALS.

At some point though, we should discuss a change of the bylaws and MOU 
in this respect to avoid unnecessary bureaucracy in the future.
The type of discussion we are undergoing now is exactly what frightens 
most individuals and volunteer organisations who are a member or willing 
to join the EURALO. They certainly prefer to discuss ICANN policies - I 
am one of them.

Best
Annette


Patrick Vande Walle schrieb:
> Annette Muehlberg wrote:
>   
>> Veronica applied already in January and the ALAC, who discussed
>> proposing Veronica as one of the candidates 
>>     
> AFAIK, two candidates stood up in January: Dessi and myself.  If the
> ALAC proposed anyone else in a totally non-transparent manner, it
> clearly means that the ALAC does not care about what the ALSes suggest.
> This is exactly the sort of attitude we expect the new ALAC
> representatives to fight against.
>   
>> Instead of creating bureaucracy we should be practical: 
>>     
> The only way to be practical is to respect the letter of the documents
> we have signed. When I sign a document, I commit to respect it, whether
> it suits me or not. And if I had a fundamental disagreement, I'd resign.
>
> Further, this is not only an agreement between ourselves ALSes. It is
> also an agreement with another party, who could reasonably feel damaged
> by us "interpreting creatively" or breaking, as you want, the agreement
> we signed.
>   
>> it is the same situation as with the EURALO board 
>>     
> It is different. We explicitly agreed there could be non ALS members on
> the board.
>   
>> As far as I know, the NomCom is not restricted to select a person who
>> is a member of an ALS, the EURALO should not be so either.
>>     
> The Nomcom obeys to other rules. One of the things we should ask in the
> nomcom review is to give to the RALOs the possibility to elect  all 15
> members of the  ALAC. But this is another story.
>
> Patrick
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EURO-Discuss mailing list
> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>