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

Sat Sep 29 10:17:40 EDT 2007

Robert,

It was not within your prerogative to create a "short
list".  The concept of a "short list" was never
introduced to the membership, it was never discussed,
and it was never sanctioned.

You did not have the right to remove a duly nominated
candidate from the voting roster!

I don't give a damn if you and others "in ICANN" had
negative views of the candidate.  Your obligation was
to honor the process by allowing a vote on all duly
confirmed candidates to be held.  Perhaps given the
choice the members of the ALAC might have elected a
"user" representative instead an individual that
serves as an elected representative for the registrar
constituency while also serving on the board of the
CIRA registry.

Your actions are indefensible and your resignation is
warranted.

--- Robert Guerra <lists at privaterra.info> wrote:

> 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
> 
=== message truncated ===> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at
> https://st.icann.org/naralo/
> ------

____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/