[NA-Discuss] Ramping up for the election - General Procedures
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Sat Jun 1 17:36:40 UTC 2013
At 01/06/2013 01:20 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
>On 5/31/13 7:49 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> > Regarding the selection of the unaffiliated rep, the procedures also
> > cover that, and as one of the final acts as this year's rep, I will
> > oversee the process.
> > As a reminder to anyone who is interested, to be an unaffiliated
> > member of NARALO, one must submit a Statement of Interest indicating
> > that he/she meet the following criteria:
> > - be subscribed to the NA-Discuss list;
> > - be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the
> > North American region as defined by ICANN;
> > - not be a member of a certified ALS.
> > Such an unaffiliated membership continues until or unless one of the
> > criteria is fails to be satisfied (ie leaves the list, ceases to be a
> > resident of NA, or is a member of an organization that is or becomes
> > a NARALO ALS).
> > I note that membership in ISOC Canada, which has just become an ALS,
> > is an example of a reason for losing unaffiliated status.
>Thank you Alan. This is Rule 17.
>ISOC Chapters come and go. A former co-worker at CORE has been
>starting a chapter in Norway, where a chapter existed, became
>moribund, and finally was dissolved. At Large Structure certifications
>come and go also.
>The 2007 MoU establishing NARALO contains this decertification
>5. "Agreed Responsiblities of the NARALO"
>f) "Providing advice to the ICANN At Large Advisory Committee about
>the certification and, if necessary, decertification of different ALSs
>and the use of outreach and communication tool across the region."
>EURALO has a draft decertification procedure document. LACRALO and
>AFRALO have published substantive criteria. The NARALO criteria is
>tied only to "voting", and so capable of being met by a single person
>representing him or her self as an organization.
>For instance, the Canadian Association for Open Source appears
>quiessent, Peter Salus stopped blogging there in 2006, Bill Traynor in
>2007, Evan Liebovitch in 2008, with only Russell McOrmond continuing
>to January, 2012. No "recent posts" reflected in its log for the past
>twelve months, three only in the past twenty four months, six only,
>and all by the same person, for the past 36 months.
>I've no idea how this particular structure continues to meet the ALAC
>Another peculiarity is Knujon, which appears to be two persons, Garth
>and Robert Bruen, principals of a Massachusetts LLC and a Vermont
>S-Corp, respectively, with a freemium business model (free reports
>with a premium enhanced reports) and the interesting claim of
>"possibly 10,000" of what are described as "unaffiliated or
>unregistered members", along with "1000" of what are described as
>I've no idea how this particular structure ever could have met the
>ALAC certification criteria. BC membership, reasonably, but ALS
>requires due diligence by ICANN Staff which "could include, without
>limitation, ... requiring the applicant to demonstrate the identity of
>their individual constituents."
>This isn't to say the Bruen brothers businesses don't do good things,
>but it is odd to construe the enablement, participation and membership
>criteria (1, 2 and 4 of the minimum criteria for an At-Large
>Structure) as something that could possibly be met by two legal
>persons, whether siblings or private benefit corporations.
>This just happened to also catch my eye -- the latest statistics for
>the web405 website (recall the enablement, participation and
>membership criteria) is from November, 2007.
>I have a preference for eligible candidates, and for eligible electors.
I will not comment on the specific cases, but I have said many times
in many fora that we need to make sure that our (ie ICANN`s) ALSs are
indeed viable according to our rules of participation.
Moreover, it is probably timely to review those rules and make sure
they satisfy today`s needs, or modify them accordingly.
More information about the NA-Discuss