[NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the election tie

Houle Louis Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org
Fri Aug 2 21:55:50 UTC 2013


Louis Houle
La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec)
Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org

Le 2013-07-26 02:39, Eduardo Diaz a écrit :
> I suggest a litle variation:
> Let both secretariat work in conjunction while the rules are changed and a
> new vote is taken. If there ia another tie, then we can do as Evan has
> suggested.
> -ed
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
>> 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
>> 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