[EURO-Discuss] Keep the documentation
nick.ashton-hart at icann.org
Fri May 11 11:34:51 EDT 2007
With respect to the procedural irregularities which are referenced
below, may I strongly advise the region that it would be very
advisable to formally adopt rules of procedure to govern conduct of
discussion as one of the first, if not the first, order of business
after the elections process is concluded.
It is apparent that there are a number of community members who are
not familiar with good practice standards of decision-making. The
community will need to come to a shared understanding of the basics
of how to reach agreement in order to be seen as operating in a
transparent and legitimate, rules-based way, and for the decisions
that are reached to be seen to be legitimate outcomes of a process
that is itself legitimate.
In that connection I refer the community to the draft Rules of
Procedure prepared for the entire At-Large community, available from
https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?rules_of_procedure - in French,
English and Spanish.
On 11 May 2007, at 16:12, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> I hope that all the discussions going on now will remain as a
> record for the time in which the ALAC Review will take place.
> It will be interesting to know, for the reviewers, how much time is
> spent on substantial discussions, and how much time on procedural
> In particular, how much time is spent in revisiting former
> consensus decisions taken only few months earlier.
> From the attitude point of view, what is appalling, looking from
> the outside, is how a couple of people have inherited the Jeff
> William syndrome, i.e. the belief that when they speak, that means
> that this is the consensus position, and just because the majority
> does not have neither time nor envy to reply to each and every
> message, that becomes the consensus, overriding previous decisions.
> Last but not least, I do not take sides on what form of vote will
> be more democratic, I just only note that there is one
> fundamentally undemocratic approach, which is to change the rules
> of an election on the day before the elections, when nominations
> are already closed (based on the previous rules). Whether this is
> on the voting mechanism for ALAC reps, or on the number of seats
> for the Board.
> The only good thing is that, as I hoped, all ALSes have signed,
> making the whole fandango raised on the MoU a complete loss of time.
> Incidentally, I will write to a trusted third party my forecast on
> the result, and that can be compared at the end with what really
> happened. It is a bit funny, because I have the impression that
> there's a lot of noise for an election that, for the ALAC seats,
> has the result already known, if you just sit down and think.
> EURO-Discuss mailing list
> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the EURO-Discuss