[lac-discuss-en] ALAC 2nd Session? Community

[Carlton Samuels]

You're right!  What I wanted emphasized because of context is that a LACRALO
member retains the privilege of the group regardless of affiliation, even if
he acquires other rights with membership of another group, like ALAC. That
was the fact I wanted emphasized; some ALAC are also LACRALO.

My mistake was to forget one word in the sentence. So my corrected statement
is: "Every qualified LACRALO member retains the right to nominate any
qualified candidate to any post that is open for appointment or election in
LACRALO and ALAC."

Carlton

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris <
jam at jacquelinemorris.com> wrote:

> To clarify, LACRALO members do not have the right (nor do they retain it as
> they never had it) to nominate  candidates for ALL positions in ALAC, only
> the ones that the Chair has said that RALO members can nominate, in this
> case ccNSO, GNSO and some other liaisons. For example, only ALAC members can
> nominate for Board Liaison, for Chair, etc.
> But yes, when the vote is called, the LACRALO can tell its reps how to
> vote.
> Jacqueline
>
>
> Carlton Samuels wrote:
>
>> Dear Colleagues:
>> We need to understand that every LACRALO member retains the right to
>> nominate any qualified candidate to any post that is open for appointment
>> or
>> election in LACRALO and ALAC.  Our representatives on the ALAC do not lose
>> their right to nominate.
>>
>> Elections and appointments are handled in totally different ways.
>>
>> Under the existing rules, it is the ALAC that elects or appoints liaisons.
>> Ordinarily, our ALAC representatives would consult with the membership
>> before they vote on substantive issues.  But under extraordinary
>> circumstances, we would expect them to use their sense of the sentiments
>> of
>> the majority of ALS and cast their votes on our behalf.
>>
>> In the case of liaisons and when the time comes, LACRALO may decide and
>> instruction our representatives on which candidate to support when the
>> ALAC
>> vote is called.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Carlton
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:08 PM, <presidencia at internauta.org.ar> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
>>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: ALAC 2nd Session? Community
>>> From: to presidencia at internauta.org.ar
>>>
>>> Dear Rudy:
>>>
>>> It will try to clarify your doubts on the subject of our representatives.
>>>
>>> In Internaut we understand that the representatives can act single if
>>> they
>>> take mandate of his
>>> THIN to the ALAC meetings, we did not conceive the participation of the
>>> ALS
>>> in this space
>>> without the possibility that we pruned ourselves to express by means of
>>> our
>>> representatives to
>>> hour of which these are before their pairs of other regional ones.
>>>
>>> It is why I believe that to do this it is to make "good you practice of
>>> total participation and
>>> pertinent ".
>>>
>>> We did not send to our companions so that they think what they think that
>>> we
>>> goodly we can think, if not to reflect the exact thought of all the ALS
>>> that
>>> they inside express in the different meetings and interchange from
>>> electronic correspondence
>>> of the LACRALO.
>>>
>>> To be but sure which I did was a proposal, there is a single companionof
>>> the LACRALO that
>>> it has been proposed to be liasson in point MOBI (DotMOBI) andI believe
>>> that serious good that
>>> a companion of Latin America and the Caribbean can be there, if there is
>>> no
>>> opposition or if nobody
>>> it are expressed I suggested is taken silence like a manifestation from
>>> the
>>> will (single
>>> in this case until we determine as we handled ourselves thus in these
>>> questions) and,
>>> our companions can go with mandate to vote by this companions proposed.
>>>
>>> With respect to the "policy of participation of ICANN" there was
>>> sufficient
>>> time stops
>>> to participate and to give its opinions in that sense, and no ALS I
>>> present/display a document
>>> alternative to this.
>>>
>>> Memory that single ALS (Alfa Redi) had been expressed in opposition, but
>>> I
>>> do not present/display
>>> nothing alternative nor worthy to struggle the subject.
>>>
>>> One occurred to a sufficient time for his debate and putting in knowledge
>>> of all.
>>>
>>> In he completes LACRALO meeting defined itself that the this serious
>>> Definitive Document,
>>> shipment to the list for his completes overhaul, and when negatively not
>>> expressing anybody on
>>> the subject is assumed that that is the position that our representatives
>>> must defend, in
>>> definitive, for that they were chosen, to express the opinionsof the
>>> majorities in
>>> different scopes of participation of ICANN and do not stop to express
>>> their
>>> personal point of view,
>>> if some of them wants to express itself, I could do it in the monthly
>>> meetings of the LACRALO
>>> or in this list of discussion. When they go to the ALAC meetings, they
>>> must
>>> consensuar with his
>>> companions the points that are going away to discuss and as are the
>>> definitions that go away a
>>> to take. I hope to have been of aid
>>>
>>> My more respectful greetings
>>>
>>> Sergio
>>>
>>> Original Message
>>> From: <rmedina at alfa-redi.org>
>>> To: <presidencia at internauta.org.ar>
>>> Cc: <lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 8:09 P.m.
>>> Subject: Re: [ lac-discuss-is ] ALAC 2nd Session? Community
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Sergio:
>>>
>>> Of prudent with your request of information on the ICANN meeting.
>>> He would be interesting to know some details of the meetings, to the
>>> margin
>>> of all the information that can be found in the Web.
>>>
>>> Of another side, I would like to know the reasons by which ours
>>> representatives of the LACRALO must take like mandate the nomination of
>>> Andrés. I do not have left the reason for it clear and I am not sure that
>>> that
>>> be a usual practice in other THIN, but clear I can be mistaken.
>>>
>>> Finally to indicate to the members of the list of the LACRALO that Alpha
>>> Redi does not subscribe, supports or does his the rough draft of policy
>>> letter
>>> of trip (or as you call?participación well) in Icann.
>>>
>>> Warm greetings,
>>>
>>> Ruddy Medina
>>> Redi Alpha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> presidency Internaut wrote: > Dear representing companions of LACRALO:
>>> podria some of you > to inform to us on the subjects treated in reunion
>>> of
>>> today 4 of November about > 20087 in ALAC? I have wanted to enter and to
>>> be
>>> impossible to be able to see me or > to listen to nothing in marinates
>>> acrobat. > On the other hand I want to propose that both representing of
>>> the
>>> LACRALO they take > like mandate the nomination of Andres Piazza to be
>>> liasson of mobi (dot > mobi). if nobody is against this gustaria me that
>>> silence isinterpreted > in this ocacion as an express mandate to our
>>> representativeson this > point. > Envio in case they do not remember our
>>> companions the final document > on the "politicas of participation of
>>> ICANN"
>>> (badly called "the politicas ones > of trips"), which this but down, if
>>> some
>>> of our companions > needs I can send it by electronic mail or e to it pdf
>>> >
>>> warm greetings > Sergio > > POSITION OF LACRALO BEFORE THE NEW POLITICAS
>>> OF
>>> PARTICIPATION OF ICANN ( > !
>>>
>>>  BADLY TRIP CALLS POLITICAS) > > the participant organizations of the
>>> Civil
>>> Society of ICANN,we have taken > knowledge of the decision that has taken
>>> east organism to change the form > of PARTIPACION in the same one. > > >
>>> Who
>>> we formed part of organizations ALS we considered that > political of
>>> trips
>>> has a close relationship with the participation of > Usuary of Internet
>>> in
>>> ICANN, reason why we rejected emphatically > decision that is that
>>> attempt
>>> to the policies and principlesfrom ICANN and by > of Internet. > > > we
>>> talked about badly to called "the political ones of trips" ". > > > >
>>> Entendemos that this is thus, so that this in game the fact not to
>>> travel, >
>>> but the total potentiality of participation of the civil society in this
>>> >
>>> organism. > > > we are convinced that the participation in ICANN implies
>>> theinteraction > between governments, companies and users to be able to
>>> counton an organization > that directs the destinies of Internet in right
>>> and democratic form. > !
>>>
>>>  > > we did not conceive but in this only sense the participati!
>>>  on of th
>>> e society > civil like representatives of the end users of Internet,
>>> within
>>>
>>>
>>>> ICANN-Consideramos that ICANN has responded until now to the
>>>> expectations
>>>> raised, opening to the participation of the OSC like part of a process >
>>>>
>>>>
>>> formativo that demands the incorporation of all the actors who
>>> participate >
>>> in the life of Internet. > > > Therefore, every day, is more important
>>> obtaining than others > organizations are gotten up in the real decision
>>> making. > > > If one looks for a greater participation must surpass the
>>> limitations > that until now makes difficult the decision making.
>>> Although
>>> in > the present time has meetings by teleconferencing, this onemeans of
>>> >
>>> communication is limited as opposed to the decision making from the ALS
>>> in >
>>> the actual meetings according to which they arrange our statutes. > > >
>>> Is
>>> imperative by virtue of the search of consensuses, that ICANN looks for
>>> others > average of reduction of costs. > > > Entendemos that one of them
>>> could be to trim the !
>>>
>>>  costs of > representation of the structures of governments, since
>>> wellthey
>>> could > to support the costs of participation based on the interests of
>>> each
>>> one > of the countries in taking part in the global policies of
>>> communication. > > > > we are convinced that a this serious way solid and
>>> been worth of construction > political you publish of each one of the
>>> states
>>> with respect to the TICS, > prioritizing the transparency of management,
>>> economic independence, sovereignty > political and the self-determination
>>> of
>>> the towns, like cannot be waived norms > of the countries at the time of
>>> the
>>> confrontation of ideas and proposals that prioritize > the interests of
>>> all
>>> the humanity and the towns in individual. > > > Is important that the
>>> weakest sector is had the charge of in their participation, already >
>>> that
>>> in ICANN occurs the fact that two strong sectors participate from >
>>> economic
>>> (companies and governments) and one weak one (ALS), is necessary > to
>>> safeguard the rights of th!
>>>
>>>  e majorities (the Users of Internet), that > finds as opposed !
>>>  to in a
>>> position of inequality the powerful ones. > > > the history of our region
>>> has demonstrated that the work tous between > different representative
>>> sectors from the democratic life, have affirmed > value of the plurality.
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>> we do not understand the total and pertinent participation without the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> three > valued estates of representation are seated in equality of >
>>> conditions and possibilities, that is to say, a true World-wide
>>> government
>>> of > Internet with egalitarian tripartite representation, between States,
>>> Companies > and End users of Internet. > > > Is why we insisted on the
>>> total
>>> participation of how until now > we have participated and we did not
>>> resign
>>> to the rights acquired in ICANN by > the Users of Internet. > > > > Must
>>> be
>>> adopted political effective to avoid the concentration of > information
>>> and
>>> the decisions of the policies in ICANN. If few have > the possibility of
>>> controlling the information is not possible a participation > total and
>>> pertinent. > > > Entend!
>>>
>>>  emos that the reduction in the possibility of participation of > End
>>> users
>>> of Internet conspires against the democratic system > established in
>>> ICANN.
>>> Since when restricting the plurality and diversity that > assures the
>>> total
>>> exercise the right to the information andparticipation of > the users
>>> causes
>>> a scene of social injustice. > > > > Those that it has more discuss and
>>> participate and those that less they have and more contribute > to the
>>> system is outside the world of the debates and the construction of one >
>>> Internet better. > > > For these reasons we ratified ourselves in the
>>> search
>>> of a participation > egalitarian that improves the fulfillment of the
>>> ICANN
>>> objectives and therefore > of the Users of Internet and we hoped that the
>>> decision is reverted in > please the real participation of the end users
>>> of
>>> Internet in this > structure of world-wide participation of the destinies
>>> of
>>> Internet.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [[--Original text (es)
>>> http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/6129dd1b95.html
>>> --]]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lac-discuss-en mailing list
>>> lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>
>>>
>>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lac-discuss-en mailing list
>> lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>>
>
>