[EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election Results

Wolf Ludwig wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net
Tue Dec 12 15:11:21 CST 2006


Hi all again,

Roberto's long and detailed elaborations are just another perfect example that Jeanette is perfectly right by recalling ICANN's lack of transparence and accountability for "outsiders" (what means, people not permanently dealing on a daily level with ICANN issues - or being something in between simple minded or almost stupid like me ;-). What I followed on this list during the last weeks is a mixture of (ICANN-)legalistic/formalistic or tactical considerations always from the same insiders far beyond of any "buttom-up", political or (EURALO-)cultural discussions. And I wonder how - following this pattern - we can ever attract "outsider" civil society entities in Europe to get engaged in this process? Thanks for any - not necessarily insider - clarifications!

Regards,
Wolf


Roberto Gaetano wrote Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:35:39: 

>Jeannette,
>
>I am sorry to say, but you are completely off the mark.
>
>ICANN has nothing to do in all this. ICANN gives some general rules for
>self-organizing of constituencies, committees, and associated bodies. But
>then (and this is what is called "bottom-up" process) it gives some latitude
>in implementing it.
>I would be appalled in seeing ICANN board setting rules for the IP
>constituency. Or the NCUC. Why then for ALAC?
>Why, all of a sudden, we call on ICANN to set rules on how ALAC appoints its
>Boar Liaison?
>
>The problem is completely a different one. And it has to do with funding. It
>is obvious to whoever would look at things abstracting from names, and
>looking at functions, that all what we are talking about is if ICANN would
>pay for a Board Liaison "on top" of the regular 15 members of the committee.
>It is obvious to whoever has done any one negotiation that if you state the
>problem up front, the answer from the (General Counsel of the) "counterpart"
>is extremely unlikely to be something like "Oh, yes, actually, why not even
>more than just one".
>
>Anyway, Vittorio has been elected as ALAC Liaison to the Board, by ALAC
>plenary, who is, according to the Bylaws, the body who is responsible for
>the election. He is currently an ALAC member, and this should close the
>question until EURALO is formed. All clear, and compliant to the Bylaws.
>About additional alternate candidates, that are not members of ALAC, I
>personally cannot see how some person from outside the Committee could have
>the trust of ALAC and won an election against two strong and long time
>members like Vittorio and Wendy.
>In simple terms, we should not make confusion between somebody that has long
>membership, and the membership terminates, and a person coming from the
>outside, no matter how involved in other user-related organizations.
>
>My "no waves approach" is a suggestion to ALAC for the future. Whether you
>take it, and gain results, or you reject it, and stay put, is your choice.
>If Vittorio's term as ALAC ends before his term as Liaison, you have the
>choice. I see three possibilities:
>- insist that he remains Liaison, and get the implicit right of having
>additional funding;
>- declare him ceased, go to new elections, create a precedent and lose
>forever the right of having additional funding;
>- replace him with a different person, also outside ALAC, and claim that if
>the rules allow an outside person, elections should be open to non-member
>candidates (which seems to be your point)
>
>The question is, how are you going to motivate that you go to option 3,
>instead of 2? ICANN's reply will be, obviously, that you are welcome to go
>to option 2, and you can forget forever about option 3 (and 1, for that
>matter).
>
>On one thing I agree with you, this is not a perfect world.
>Maybe where we differ is on how to change it.
>
>Best regards,
>Roberto
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wz-berlin.de] 
>> Sent: 08 December 2006 11:49
>> To: Discussion for At-Large Europe; roberto at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee 
>> Election Results
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Roberto Gaetano schrieb:
>> > I don't think that this was the situation "by design", but rather a 
>> > side effect on how the bylaws are written.
>> 
>> Hi Roberto,
>> 
>> this is the problem with ICANN as I see it since I watch its 
>> performance. There are always honorable reasons for 
>> maintaining ambiguous practices or stretching rules. But from 
>> the outside, such practices look somewhat fishy.
>> 
>> In order to grow up and to gain the trust ICANN needs to do 
>> its work, it is really, really necessary that ICANN 
>> establishes an equivalent to the rule of law, an equivalent 
>> that provides for reliable procedures and predictable decisions.
>> 
>> Your small steps, no big waves approach makes sense from an 
>> insider's perpective but from outside, it looks like more of 
>> the same muddling through approach that seems so 
>> characterstic for many of ICANN's decisions.
>> 
>> I know, I am repeating myself, I said the very same thing on 
>> another list a few days ago: ICANN needs to constitutionlize 
>> itself, its actions need to follow self binding rules that 
>> people know and that people can appeal to if they are 
>> supposedly violated. ALAC should not be an exception to this 
>> but rather a model for other constiuencies or groups in ICANN.
>> 
>> jeanette
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > We are getting there with small steps, not to create too big waves.
>> > We did it with Bret as GTLD Liaison, in the moment when we 
>> were also 
>> > replacing another NA member (John Levine was selected).
>> > We are trying this with Vittorio, as the situation is now that it 
>> > would take an active step by the Board to discontinue him after his 
>> > expiration as ALAC member, and I don't think that the Board 
>> will ever open this can of worms.
>> > Then we will much better off for claiming it as established 
>> practice.
>> > This is, at least, my approach. Sorry for being more 
>> careful than some 
>> > of you would like, but I have the impression that this strategy has 
>> > paid off, up to now. Also, I do believe that one thing is a 
>> proposal 
>> > for candidature that comes from an ALS, and another thing, 
>> with more 
>> > weight, will be a candidature that comes from a established RALO.
>> > Cheers,
>> > Roberto
>> > 
>> > 
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >> [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of 
>> >> Jeanette Hofmann
>> >> Sent: 08 December 2006 10:03
>> >> To: Discussion for At-Large Europe
>> >> Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election 
>> >> Results
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Roberto Gaetano schrieb:
>> >>> Two additions to the comprehensive explanation by Vittorio.
>> >>>
>> >>> There is nothing that prevents Vittorio to continue as
>> >> Board Liaison
>> >>> even if he terminates as ALAC member. Quite the contrary,
>> >> this is an
>> >>> advantage, as we will have the possibility to cover this
>> >> task without
>> >>> impacting on the other activities, that will be carried on by the 
>> >>> regular members. It was already the case for Bret as GTLD Liaison.
>> >> Now, this is interesting. Anybody can be nominated or run for the 
>> >> position as board liaison? If this is indeed the case, you 
>> might have 
>> >> got a long list of candidates if this had been known to 
>> more people.
>> >>
>> >> jeanette
>> >>
>> >>> In the future, ALSes and RALOs will be able to influence also the 
>> >>> internal mechanisms, if they discuss the matter in 
>> advance and via 
>> >>> their two representatives can bring motions to the ALAC.
>> >> This, based
>> >>> on what is discussed above, might include candidatures to Liaison 
>> >>> positions (but not Chair or Vice Chair positions).
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> Roberto
>> >>>
>> >>>  
>> >>>
>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>> From: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >>>> [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On 
>> Behalf Of 
>> >>>> Vittorio Bertola
>> >>>> Sent: 08 December 2006 09:19
>> >>>> To: patrick at isoc.lu; Discussion for At-Large Europe
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election 
>> >>>> Results
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Patrick Vande Walle ha scritto:
>> >>>>> A few days ago, it was explained on this list that the
>> >> nomcom chair
>> >>>>> would suggest a name for the ALAC liaison. Now we see
>> >> that the ALAC
>> >>>>> actually had a vote. Who decided that and when ? Who voted
>> >>>> in favour
>> >>>>> on this change ? who voted against ?
>> >>>> I think that there is a misunderstanding. The message that
>> >> was sent
>> >>>> some time ago was about appointing one new ALAC member
>> >> representing
>> >>>> EURALO, since Annette, who was previously sitting in one
>> >> of the two
>> >>>> EURALO seats, decided to apply for Roberto's seat - the one 
>> >>>> representing ICANN and appointed by the ICANN Nomcom - and
>> >> the Nomcom
>> >>>> picked her. Thus, this frees up one of the two EURALO
>> >> seats, which,
>> >>>> until we formally incorporate EURALO and sign an MoU with
>> >> ICANN, is
>> >>>> to be filled by the ICANN Board. As soon as we sign that 
>> MoU, the 
>> >>>> ICANN-Board-appointed ALAC members (they being me and 
>> whoever will 
>> >>>> get appointed in place of Annette in the next few weeks)
>> >> will expire,
>> >>>> and EURALO will have to appoint two representatives in the ALAC.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The ICANN Board, however, usually asks for advice before
>> >> making the
>> >>>> appointment; initially, since this is going to be a short-lived 
>> >>>> appointment - we hope to finalize the EURALO process by 
>> the ICANN 
>> >>>> Lisbon meeting, next March - Roberto and I suggested 
>> that we could 
>> >>>> ask the Nomcom to provide another name, which would have
>> >> allowed the
>> >>>> Board to make a very quick appointment, and thus to bring the 
>> >>>> appointed person here in Sao Paulo for this ICANN meeting.
>> >> However,
>> >>>> there was another proposal that the three European ALAC
>> >> members pick
>> >>>> someone instead. I strongly disagree on that, because I
>> >> think that if
>> >>>> we don't go for a quick appointment, then it should be the
>> >> ALSes who
>> >>>> suggest someone, also because it might be someone that the ALSes 
>> >>>> might want to reappoint after we sign the MoU in March
>> >> (though there
>> >>>> is absolutely no constraint to that effect). So we discussed the 
>> >>>> matter here in Sao Paulo, and all the three European 
>> ALAC members 
>> >>>> agreed to make a call to the European ALSes to suggest 
>> one or more 
>> >>>> names, to be then discussed and forwarded to the ICANN Board for 
>> >>>> consideration; Annette is supposed to post that call shortly.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In any case, please all of you start considering and
>> >> posting possible
>> >>>> nominees (or self-nominations) as temporary European 
>> ALAC member, 
>> >>>> even if it might be just for a few months and for one
>> >> ICANN meeting
>> >>>> in Lisbon. Also, I want to make it clear that I will not
>> >> reapply for
>> >>>> my seat, I think that four years is enough and I really
>> >> want some new
>> >>>> people from this group to be able to serve on the ALAC (I
>> >> said this
>> >>>> in public before being appointed as ALAC Board liaison, so
>> >> it's not
>> >>>> connected to that).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The message that Nick sent yesterday, instead, was about
>> >> the internal
>> >>>> ALAC appointments: the ALAC, as any Committee, has to 
>> appoint its 
>> >>>> Chair, Vice Chairs, and also a number of liaisons to 
>> other bodies.
>> >>>> These positions are to be filled internally by the ALAC, as they 
>> >>>> represent the distribution of labour among its members. In this 
>> >>>> specific case, there was no established procedure, and even no 
>> >>>> advance knowledge of all the nominations, so it was actually 
>> >>>> impossible to have any further consultation - it was all decided 
>> >>>> yesterday at an open meeting of the ALAC. I still see it a bit 
>> >>>> difficult to imagine that these positions can be filled by
>> >> a broader
>> >>>> group than the ALAC itself, since they are really connected to 
>> >>>> internal balances in a 15-people group that has to work
>> >> together, but
>> >>>> I already suggested that the ALAC should have better
>> >> procedures for
>> >>>> these appointments, which could allow sufficient time to have a 
>> >>>> consultation with the RALOs about the various nominees.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ciao,
>> >>>> -- 
>> >>>> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] 
>> >>>> bertola.eu.org]<-----
>> >>>> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> >>>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >>>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a
>> >>>> tlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> >>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >>>
>> >> 
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-
>> >> l
>> >>> ists.icann.org
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> >> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a
>> >> tlarge-lists.icann.org
>> > 
>> > 
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> > EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> > 
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a
>> tlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>EURO-Discuss mailing list
>EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>

comunica-ch
phone +41 79 204 83 87
www.comunica-ch.net



More information about the EURO-Discuss mailing list