[NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO Operating Procedures
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Tue Aug 6 14:15:52 UTC 2013
At 06/08/2013 08:31 AM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>Nice job, Alan!
>I would also offer the following:
>#4 Only mentions English and French - Spanish should also be included.
I also note that what is there is not actually correct, in that with
very few exceptions, we have not translated anything (the Operating
Principles) were among the very few I could find). I'm not saying
that is good, but that is the reality. I would suggest that this
section is not causing us any IMMEDIATE OPERATIONAL problems, and
that when we do a re-write, we replace it with something that is both
realistic and accurate, and adheres to the current ALAC/ICANN rules
and policies. As such it will require more discussion than we want
now to get these "fixes" in place.
>#12 refers to ALAC members being chosen by a rough consensus
>process. This has never been done. It has always been done by a
>voting process. The rough consensus wording should rather be used
>for routine decisions.
I am happy to make such a change if there is such a will.
>#16. If an ALS loses its voting status, how can it regain it through voting?
This is something that we should fix, as cleaning up of ALAS status
should be a high-priority issue. Can you offer a quick fix? One that
comes to mind is that at the one year point they are notified and
have one year to fix or we mark inactive and recommends decertification.
>Darlene A. Thompson
>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 Alan
>Greenberg [alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca]
>Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 3:10 PM
>Subject: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO Operating Procedures
>I offer the following draft of the reviser NARALO Operating Procedures
>In summary, I have changed:
>- a number of things we noted before as problems but never fixed
>- the tie-breaking which triggered this revision
>- other important things I found along the way.
>All of our documents are BADLY in need of revision. This is NOT that
>effort, but I have tried to fix the really serious issues and
>particularly ones that have caused us problems in the past.
>In detail by section number:
>7. Adding the possibility for a shared Secretariat, which already
>implied in section 8 by the "person(s)". As far as I can find, we
>have no "language requirements", so I deleted the reference to it.
>9. That is primarily where the ALAC Member responsibilities now
>reside (or pointed to by RoP).
>11. Removal of the term "Statement of Interest" which now has another
>meaning. Nominations is what this process is referred to in ALAC
>docs, and in fact, that is what actually happens except in the rare
>12. Goes with above.
>15. Currently, only a rep of a true ALS can vote to alter the
>Operating Procedures. The representative of unaffiliated members was
>accidentally omitted. This fixes that.
>16. Since we say that selections should largely be by consensus, this
>fits better than just counting votes which might not happen.
>17. Again removing a mis-used "Statement of Interest" and making the
>process clear. I also made it clear how you lose unaffiliated
>membership. I removed what is essentially an implementation issue
>that did not belong in the rules and added a tie-breaking rule
>patterned on that in 13.
>19. The new rule for tie-breaking in a Chair or Secretariat election.
>20. To counteract section 12.9 of the Procedure for Meetings which
>says we vote like LAC, with weighted voting balancing countries.
>21. Fix the many discrepancies among documents.
More information about the NA-Discuss