[NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the election tie
Garth Bruen
gbruen at knujon.com
Thu Aug 1 00:55:17 UTC 2013
Folks,
I've stayed out of this thread as long as possible to ensure a good
discussion. However, here are my thoughts.
First, on sharing the post. I do not believe the community can or should
make the two candidates share the post. I think it is up to the two
candidates to reach an agreement on their own for doing that. Since there
are no documented guidelines for who would do what in a shared post I would
rather not throw two people into untested waters. In general, I am not
opposed to the concept, but it needs to be clearly structured.
Second, on the tie breaker. I feel like letting the Chair pick is like
giving one person two votes, not in favor of it. I don't like flipping a
coin because the loser and their supporters will always feel cheated.
Letting the ALAC chair decide may sound like a good idea, the ALAC Chair may
not always know enough about a particular region's needs to choose wisely.
So, that leaves the NARALO ALAC members with a tie-breaking vote. I believe
this last option is the wisest and most democratic.
-Garth
-----Original Message-----
From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glenn
McKnight
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 6:43 PM
Cc: NARALO Discussion List
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the election
tie
Hi
Upon careful consideration of the plus and minuses of a shared position for
secretariat, on paper it appears a good compromise but in reality it tends
not to work well. I choice not to share the position for numerous reasons.
I am sure NARALO will survive with either winner of a relection.
.
As stated I rather see the results of a reelection for the position
Glenn.
Glenn McKnight
mcknight.glenn at gmail.com
skype gmcknight
twitter gmcknight
.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Gordon Chillcott <gordontc at look.ca> wrote:
> After some thought, I' for another vote as well.
>
> Gordon
>
>
> On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 15:43 -0400, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On 7/31/2013 3:19 PM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> > > I'm with Eduardo. Another vote.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Eduardo Diaz
> > > <eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > >> I will go for another vote. If there is another draw, then the
> > >> three
> ALAC
> > >> members from the region will move into action. However, since
> > >> this
> not in
> > >> any rules we should reach consensus on this (on any other
> > >> solution)
> before
> > >> executing. I do not believe sharing is a good option.
> > >>
> > >> -ed
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Thompson, Darlene <
> DThompson1 at gov.nu.ca
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> Ah, good question Alan,
> > >>>
> > >>> As we have been discussing for a while, there are quite a few
> > >>> areas
> in
> > >> our
> > >>> Rules of Procedure that need to be updated. So, I am thinking
> > >>> that
> if we
> > >>> put a lot of time into a robust set of rules for this one
> > >>> matter,
> then we
> > >>> will have to address all of the other matters later. This will
> prolong
> > >> the
> > >>> discussions on the list interminably on procedural matters.
> > >>> This
> would
> > >> be
> > >>> a real distraction from the actual policy work that the NARALO
> should be
> > >>> focusing on. For that reason, I would be more in favour of
> > >>> dealing
> with
> > >>> changes to the RoP all at once. So, I am leaning towards
> > >>> getting
> this
> > >>> election over with and then a small subset can concentrate on
> re-drafting
> > >>> the RoP for the NARALO's consideration while the rest of the
> > >>> group
> can
> > >>> continue with important policy work.
> > >>>
> > >>> I am also seeing now that the problem with option #3 - sharing
> > >>> of
> work -
> > >>> could be problematic if one of the candidates has no desire to do
so.
> > >> The
> > >>> RALO cannot really force this. The Rules of Procedure already
> > >>> ALLOW
> for
> > >>> it, so perhaps we need to have an either/or going forward. IF
> > >>> the
> tied
> > >>> parties agree to work together, allow it. If not, then option
> > >>> #1
> (random
> > >>> selection) or #2 (vote by NARALO ALAC members) should be undertaken.
> > >> This
> > >>> would have to be something that the group would need to decide
> > >>> on
> prior
> > >> to
> > >>> re-holding the election although most seem to be leaning towards #2.
> > >>>
> > >>> I have already indicated my preferences in the above, so this is
> > >> something
> > >>> that the group needs to decide.
> > >>>
> > >>> D
> > >>>
> > >>> Darlene A. Thompson
> > >>> CAP Administrator
> > >>> N-CAP/Department of Education
> > >>> P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> > >>> Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0
> > >>> Phone: (867) 975-5631
> > >>> Fax: (867) 975-5610
> > >>> dthompson at gov.nu.ca
> > >>> ________________________________________
> > >>> From: Alan Greenberg [alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca]
> > >>> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 3:50 PM
> > >>> To: Thompson, Darlene; Bob Bruen; Thomas Lowenhaupt
> > >>> Cc: NARALO Discussion List
> > >>> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the
> > >> election
> > >>> tie
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks Darlene. There is no question that we need a obust set of
> > >>> rules that can handle situations such as this. The only
> > >>> immediate question, as I outlined in my earlier note, is do we
> > >>> need them for THIS election.
> > >>>
> > >>> Alan
> > >>>
> > >>> At 27/07/2013 03:18 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
> > >>>> Thank you Bob,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Along this line, when NARALO was still new and nobody really
> > >>>> knew what they were doing, Luc and I did just fine sharing
> > >>>> responsibilities. We e-mailed back and forth a lot and just
> > >>>> decided between us who would do what. It was pretty easy.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> NARALO has now grown a lot, as have the people within it. Each
> > >>>> person brings their own talents and skills to the table. I
> > >>>> think that Glenn and my talents are diverse enough that we
> > >>>> should be able to divvy up the workload and actually be able to
> > >>>> grow more initiatives for the region - each taking the lead in
> > >>>> what they prefer or where their skills are. I am quite
> > >>>> flexible and would, of course, do everything I can to make it
> > >>>> work - as I always do. I do not think that we need the job to
> > >>>> be "codified" as it is constantly changing as per the needs of the
group.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Having said that, I would also be in favour of the tie-breaker
> > >>>> solution offered by the 3 ALAC members but my preference will
> > >>>> always be to try to grow and expand the talent pool in the region.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> D
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Darlene A. Thompson
> > >>>> CAP Administrator
> > >>>> N-CAP/Department of Education
> > >>>> P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> > >>>> Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0
> > >>>> Phone: (867) 975-5631
> > >>>> Fax: (867) 975-5610
> > >>>> dthompson at gov.nu.ca
> > >>>> ________________________________________
> > >>>> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >>>> [na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Bob
> > >>>> Bruen [bruen at coldrain.net]
> > >>>> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:24 PM
> > >>>> To: Thomas Lowenhaupt
> > >>>> Cc: NARALO Discussion List
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with
> > >>>> the
> > >> election
> > >>> tie
> > >>>> Hi,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Darlene has been at this job for long enough to know what to
> > >>>> do. I
> > >> expect
> > >>>> that she and Glenn could figure out how to share the
> responsibilities,
> > >>>> then let us know. They are both reasonable adults. If there is
> > >>>> a
> > >> problem,
> > >>>> I am sure the Chair could be helpful in settling it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --bob
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I think the shared responsibility can work. But we must define
> > >> specific
> > >>>>> responsibilities and metrics for each co-secretary. These
> > >>>>> metrics
> > >>> will be
> > >>>>> quite helpful when the next election comes along, at least in
> > >>>> evaluating the
> > >>>>> performance of the cos.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Tom Lowenhaupt
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 7/27/2013 11:37 AM, Skuce, Allan wrote:
> > >>>>>> I still prefer #3. What an opportunity to grow, lead by
> > >>>>>> example,
> and
> > >>> deal
> > >>>>>> with the great workload. Cheers, Allan
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Dharma Dailey
> > >>>>>> <dharma.dailey at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Have we reached clarity on whether folks feel the job can be
> > >> shared?
> > >>> The
> > >>>>>>> last message from Glenn, I recall, was along the lines of
> "looking
> > >>> into
> > >>>>>>> it." It might be easier on all parties if some of the
> > >>>>>>> details
> were
> > >>>>>>> discussed before hand so no one is surprised re: who is
> > >>>>>>> doing
> what.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Dharma
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2013, at 6:44 PM, "Thompson, Darlene" <
> > >>> DThompson1 at GOV.NU.CA>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi all,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I would like to encourage all NARALO members to consider
> > >>>>>>>> the
> > >> options
> > >>>>>>> that Evan has posited below and respond to same. Without
> consensus
> > >>> we
> > >>>>>>> cannot move forward on this issue.
> > >>>>>>>> Thank you for your time on this!
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> D
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Darlene A. Thompson
> > >>>>>>>> CAP Administrator
> > >>>>>>>> N-CAP/Department of Education P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> > >>>>>>>> Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0
> > >>>>>>>> Phone: (867) 975-5631
> > >>>>>>>> Fax: (867) 975-5610
> > >>>>>>>> dthompson at gov.nu.ca
> > >>>>>>>> ________________________________________
> > >>>>>>>> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [
> > >>>>>>> na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of
> > >>>>>>> Evan
> > >>>> Leibovitch [
> > >>>>>>> evan at telly.org]
> > >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 4:44 PM
> > >>>>>>>> To: NARALO Discussion List
> > >>>>>>>> Subject: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with
> > >>>>>>>> the
> > >>>> election tie
> > >>>>>>>> Hello all,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I would like to suggest conducting a poll of NARALO members
> > >>>>>>>> on
> the
> > >>> best
> > >>>>>>> way
> > >>>>>>>> to deal with the tie for Secretariat resulting from the
> > >>> recently-held
> > >>>>>>> vote.
> > >>>>>>>> While we need to revise our regulations regarding
> > >>>>>>>> tie-breaking,
> we
> > >>> have
> > >>>>>>> an
> > >>>>>>>> immediate need to resolve the current situation before the
> > >>>>>>>> next
> > >>> ICANN
> > >>>>>>>> meeting.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Based on discussions I have heard to date, there are three
> > >>>>>>>> paths
> > >> to
> > >>>>>>>> resolving this that have received some interest:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> 1. Random tie-break
> > >>>>>>>> The votes for ALSs and unaffiliated members is re-held,
> > >>>>>>>> and
> the
> > >>> rules
> > >>>>>>>> are modified. If another tie results, the tie is broken
> > >>>>>>>> by a
> > >>> random
> > >>>>>>> method,
> > >>>>>>>> supervised by at least two non-candidate members and/or
> > >> At-Large
> > >>>>>>>> staff.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> 2. Tie-break by NA-Region ALAC members
> > >>>>>>>> The votes for ALSs and unaffiliated members is re-held
> > >>>>>>>> and
> he
> > >>> rules
> > >>>>>>>> are
> > >>>>>>>> modified. If another tie results, the tie is broken by
> > >>>>>>>> a
> > >>> consensus
> > >>>>>>> achieved
> > >>>>>>>> in private by the three ALAC members for North America
> (Alan,
> > >>> Eduardo
> > >>>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>>> myself). Since there are three of us, no deadlock is
> > >>>>>>>> allowed
> > >>> there
> > >>>>>>>> 3. Shared Secretariat
> > >>>>>>>> No new election is held, and NARALO declares both
> > >>>>>>>> Darlene
> > >>>> and Glenn as
> > >>>>>>>> co-Secretariats. While there is no precedent for this
> > >>>>>>>> in
> > >>>> NARALO, there
> > >>>>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>> elsewhere in ICANN At-Large (both co-Chair and
> co-Secretariats
> > >>> have
> > >>>>>>> been
> > >>>>>>>> done in other regions). The two would alternate travel
> > >>>>>>>> to
> ICANN
> > >>>>>>> meetings
> > >>>>>>>> (though both would naturally be at the Summit in
> > >>>>>>>> London). In
> > >> the
> > >>> case
> > >>>>>>> that
> > >>>>>>>> any of the North American At-Large leadership cannot
> > >>>>>>>> attend
> a
> > >>> meeting
> > >>>>>>>> (Chair, travel-designated secretariat or ALAC member),
> > >>>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>> "non-travelling"
> > >>>>>>>> secretariat member would automatically be designated to
> > >>>>>>>> take
> > >> that
> > >>>>>>> travel
> > >>>>>>>> allocation. The rules may still be modified in case of
> future
> > >>> ties,
> > >>>>>>>> but
> > >>>>>>>> such action is not required immediately.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> So I am proposing that, in advance of the next NARALO call,
> > >>>>>>>> we
> > >>> could do
> > >>>>>>> an
> > >>>>>>>> informal poll of members (by Bigpulse or Doodle) to gain a
> > >>>>>>>> sense
> > >> of
> > >>>>>>>> preferences between these options that may help guide a
> > >>>>>>>> regional
> > >>>>>>> consensus
> > >>>>>>>> on the August call.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Is this a workable plan? Are the options above a valid
> > >>> representation of
> > >>>>>>>> the ones discussed? (There are some other tie-break methods
> > >>>>>>>> I
> have
> > >>>>>>>> eliminated because of lack of support to date).
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I admit that when I started thinking about the tie I had
> > >>>>>>>> not
> given
> > >>> any
> > >>>>>>>> thought to the shared secretariat idea, but it has grown on
> > >>>>>>>> me
> > >>> since.
> > >>>>>>> There
> > >>>>>>>> is a significant amount of work to do, and it would be IMO
> > >>>>>>>> a
> shame
> > >>> to
> > >>>>>>> force
> > >>>>>>>> an all-or-nothing tiebreak on two people with both popular
> > >>>> support and an
> > >>>>>>>> eagerness to do the job.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> - Evan
> > >>>>>>>> ------
> > >>>>>>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
> > >>>>>>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>> ------
> > >>>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
> > >>>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > >>>>> ------
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Dr. Robert Bruen
> > >>>> Cold Rain Labs
> > >>>> http://coldrain.net/bruen
> > >>>> +1.802.579.6288
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ------
> > >>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
> > >>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > >>>> ------
> > >>>> ------
> > >>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
> > >>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > >>>> ------
> > >>> ------
> > >>> NA-Discuss mailing list
> > >>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> > >>>
> > >>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > >>> ------
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is
> > >> confidential
> and/or
> > >> subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the
> > >> named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you
> > >> must not
> use,
> > >> disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received
> > >> this
> email by
> > >> mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message
immediately.
> > >> ------
> > >> NA-Discuss mailing list
> > >> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> > >>
> > >> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > >> ------
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ------
> > NA-Discuss mailing list
> > NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> >
> > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > ------
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
>
------
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
------
More information about the NA-Discuss
mailing list