[NA-Discuss] Results of the Voting for ALAC Nominating Committee 2008 Appointments

Sat Sep 29 10:00:34 EDT 2007

Danny:

The candidate you proposed was indeed considered, but did not make  
the short list. that was not a personal decision of mine, but of the  
NA ALAC representatives.

Informal consultations - due diligence you could call it - took place  
to assess the candidates being proposed, and if they would be well  
suited and able to strategically represent users from not only Canada  
and the USA, but users "everywhere" on the nomcom.

Your statement that no consultation was done with those on NA RALO,  
is in fact wrong.  Consultations were done with key people active on  
the NA list as well as those in ICANN. Consultations were done  done  
privately on a one -to-one basis.

I will keep the sources confidential, - they can speak out if they  
wish - but suffice it to say that your  candidate, well - got very  
mixed reviews, in fact some quite negative. Those who got far more   
favorable reviews -  ended up on the short list.

As i've mentioned now several times, my person view is that the NA  
Nomcom candidate that - was elected by a large majority of ALAC  
members - will be able to well and strategically represent the views  
from the ALAC on the nomcom. The person in is well known to civil  
society working in ICANN as a person we can work with, and who has  
integrity. We will be well served. He has another "hat" - as do many  
of us as well. So i don't see that as an issue in the least.

Indeed this whole discussion reminds me on an  ongoing discussion in  
Canada related to elections canada's stance on allowing veiled women  
to vote .

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/09/10/elections-veils.html

It's not for the administrator to settle the current societal debate.  
If I were to do so, I would assume the role that does not belong to  
me, and above all, usurp the role of Canada's elected politicians."

Currently, I do not believe criteria  exists as to who can or can not  
be a candidate for ALAC to select as its nomcom representatives. If  
you want that changed - please, by all means do suggest that ALS's  
and ALAC change the rules.

In summary - Hey, i didn't support your candidate. I have that right.  
Due process was followed, and a good, honest and very strategic  
candidate from Canada was duly elected.  Please, respect the  
decision . If you feel the process could have been better - please,  
be constructive and suggest changes so that we can improve things  
going forward.

In the meantime, decision has taken place.. let's move forward..  
Let's work with Ross, and take up his offer to speak with him on a  
teleconference. He's keen to hear from the NA RALO, and in fact ALAC  
as a whole on how he can best represent us. As he shouldn't hold him  
to a higher standard - let's also arrange consultations with the  
other ALAC nomcom reps . After all if they are supposed to be our  
representatives, let's make sure they stay in touch and consult with us.

regards

Robert

On 29-Sep-07, at 2:16 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
> Robert,
>
> Bottom line:  You removed a duly nominated candidate
> that was duly confirmed from the voting roster, a
> candidate with seven years experience within ICANN
> defending the public interest, a candidate that
> properly submitted his credentials for consideration,
> and the only confirmed candidate that hailed from the
> United States... all without any consultation with
> members of the NARALO discuss list, and without member
> consent for such action.
>
> You also introduced a candidate from the supplier
> community surreptitiously without any consultation
> with the membership.  In my view, your actions
> demonstrate that you are not fit for holding office.
>
> regards,
> Danny
>
>
> --- Robert Guerra <lists at PRIVATERRA.INFO> wrote:
>
>> I've been away for the last few days and am only now
>> catching up on
>> this list's email...
>>
>> It seems some questions have been raised as to the
>> process by which
>> the NA ALAC , and in fact ALAC as a whole selected
>> the nomcom
>> candidate from the NA region.
>>
>> First,let me describe the process -
>>
>> The NA ALAC reps held  two teleconferences where we
>> discussed the
>> Nomcom candidates. Beau, Alan and I spent
>> considerable time
>> discussing the i\, the candidates and additional
>> persons we might
>> want to consider
>>
>> The candidate pool came from names proposed on the
>> NA list, as well
>> as persons suggested by the NA Regional reps. The
>> breakdown was thus
>> - one person proposed from the NA list, and 5
>> persons suggested from
>> the ALAC reps. Of the 6 persons, one candidate was
>> removed as they
>> had been elected board liason. the rest were
>> contacted to confirm
>> that indeed they would be willing and able to serve
>> the term. Three
>> confirmed there were interested, willing and able to
>> represent ALAC
>> on nomcom. two top candidates were identified and a
>> discussion took
>> place to see if a consensus candidate could be
>> chosen. This was not
>> the case, as such the two were submitted to the ALAC
>> for them to vote
>> on.
>>
>> Key facts:
>>
>> - the two proposed candidates both were supported by
>> more then one
>> ALAC rep
>> - The consensus view that developed was that a
>> candidate should be
>> well familiar with icann and/or able to learn about
>> it's politics
>> and issues, and ability to represent the user
>> voice/view were key
>> factors needed in a candidate.
>>
>>
>> My personal choice was Ross, as i'm quite familiar
>> with his work with
>> the user community in Canada and his involvement in
>> CIRA. It is his
>> proven track record to be able to represent users on
>> the CIRA board
>> as well as his support for NCUC and ALAC view that
>> led to me voting
>> for him. In summary, I voted based on  a track
>> record in engaging
>> users and the user community (in canada) as well as
>> a very good
>> understand of ICANN, it's politics and nomcom.
>>
>> Using the recently approved voting rules adopted by
>> the ALAC,
>> candidates proposed from the regions where a
>> consensus was not
>> possible were considered by the ALAC. A one week
>> open voting & period
>> was opened  - where opinions were expressed by ALAC
>> members on
>> candidates, and voting took place.Voting closed a
>> particular day,
>> after which the results were announced.
>>
>> The existing icann bylaws state that ALAC should
>> appoint candidates -
>> and that was done. Though not specifically mentioned
>> , consulation
>> also tool place - and considerable time, and effort
>> was taken to
>> review candidates and elect one that fit the
>> criteria developed.
>>
>> Ross, in my opinion - despite what some critics
>> might say - has the
>> knowledge and ability, integrity and ability  to
>> represent ALAC and
>> users interests well  on the nomcom. I believe that
>> he will serve
>> alac well  .
>>
>> Secondly, let me say that constant critiquing ALAC
>> reps is not
>> constructive at all. Personally, I have tried to
>> bring values of
>> consultation and dialogue between those in the NA
>> ALS, ALAC members
>> and other key constituencies such as NCUC, SSAC and
>> many others . I
>> see there is great value in  collaboration - one
>> that can serve to
>> bring a stronger voice to users and civil society
>> inside the complex
>> and very political structure that is ICANN.
>>
>>
>>
>> In summary -  Key appointments and nominations need
>> to be strategic
>> and constructive. I believe that the two candidates
>> proposed were
>> good, and that the better qualified and most
>> knowledgeable person who
>> indeed will be able to serve all users from the NA
>> region has been
>> selected. Can we do things better in the future -
>> indeed we can.
>> let's learn from this experience and build a better
>> process for the
>> 08/09 nomcom selection process
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Robert
>>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> ______________
> Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your  
> story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
> http://sims.yahoo.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070929/d3538fce/attachment.html 