[lac-discuss-en] Board Liaison

[Carlton Samuels]

Although I believe I have done so already, I am still being asked for
my views of the Board Liaison election.  In my view, we have a stellar
list of candidates.  And save and except for one person, all others
are well-known to the At-Large community.  They have a body of work in
contribution to the At-Large agenda that can withstand favourable
scrutiny.

In my view, the best approach to selection is to release all
RALO-appointed ALAC members "from the whip" and allow a free vote.

In my view, the attributes of the best candidate and nature of the
work required of Board Liaison are all the same required of a voting
ALAC-appointed board member. Let me explain again.

Let us be clear: the ICANN Board is a creature of the American
corporate culture, regardless of the accents at the top. We would love
to think all members are globalists and fashioned in a milieu that
produces an enhanced connection to the civil society agenda. The
reality is that most are corporatists, representing well-defined
corporate interests.  So to thrive in this ecosystem, a Board Liaison
representing the At-Large interest or a Board Member representing the
At-Large interest must be packaged a certain way.

In my experience, the best results when working for a cause on a Board
of Management comes from being sure of the principles you support,
listening well, keenly observing your fellow members, be knowledgeable
about their causes and even more knowledgeable about the Board agenda,
being collegial and affable without being supine and having the gift
of argument to persuade.  And the person must effortlessly retain the
collective trust of the At-Large community.

In my view, you don't get too far by asking candidates to declare
fealty to the ALAC but rather to look for demonstrable attachments to
the At-Large agenda.  For declarations of fealty would inevitably
produce what I would do when I was a lad and asked to recite the
affirmation of faith in the Anglican - Episcopal - community: "I
believe in one God, Father Almighty.......".  It was sufficient to
recite it to pass muster with the priest and my duties as an acolyte.

No, I do not believe that a Board Liaison should only act when
specifically instructed by the ALAC.  Hell, for the most part, we
barely know what the ALAC agenda - all of the ALAC - is!  Much less
the At-Large!  This is where principle and knowledge of the issues
come to play.  My preferred Board Liaison must be grounded to
principle but MUST have a sense of what is happening in the room to
make an argument to shape, even persuade others to a view. That is the
argument and diplomatic skills test. You must have the ability to move
and be able to move at Internet speed, not at the rhythm that
instructions will come from At-Large thru ALAC. This is the reason for
knowledge of issues and grounding to principle.  And you must be able
to communicate what you think and how it connects to principle so that
others can catch up.   In short, I do not want or wish an empty vessel
as either Board Liaison or At-Large voting Board Member.

Beyond the statement of candidates but certainly with knowledge of
their work and from close observation over time, I believe it is
possible to make the right choice.

Carlton Samuels