[NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures

[Seth M Reiss]

Second point is a good one.  From a constitutional point of view, perhaps
not.  But simply for purposes of internal management, perhaps so.  

-----Original Message-----
From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
Lowenhaupt
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:47 AM
To: na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures

I'd like to raise a question or two about paragraphs 20 and 21

20. All consensus decisions and votes of the General Assembly members shall
weight all members equally.

Does that give each individual members as much voting power as
organizations?

21. Where these Operating Principles may conflict with the NARALO Rules of
Procedure for Meetings or the Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN, these
Operating Principles shall prevail.

Can we unilaterally modify the MOU?

Tom Lowenhaupt




On 8/8/2013 2:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> Doesn't the second sentence of #13 contradict #19?
>
> In any case I still prefer the original form of #13; if you like add 
> the word "secret" before "vote" but I'm not sure what is broken in 
> this specific spot that needs fixing. That NARALO has used consensus 
> more often than other regions is IMO a feature, not a bug, and 
> needless synchronization with other regions for its own sake is not a 
> worthwhile goal.
>
> I thought were were going for a minimal set of changes to accommodate 
> problems specifically raised by the current voting situation; anything 
> beyond that should be off the table right now.
>
>
> On 8 August 2013 12:48, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>
>> Based on comments, I have made a few more changes. These are shown in
BLUE.
>>
>> 12/13. Normal procedure in the ALAC is now to hold secret votes for 
>> elections/selections that are contended. The changes to 12 and 13 
>> allow the NARALO to do this as well. This is in fact how we have been 
>> operating, so the change just ratifies our existing behavior.
>>
>> 16. Correct and error that said a suspended ALS could regain their 
>> active status by voting, but voting is the thing they are not allowed 
>> to do if inactive. Also added a provision whereby NARALO can request 
>> the the ALAC de-certify an essentially defunct ALS. The ALAC would 
>> still need to conduct due diligence, so the procedures in NARALO do 
>> not need to be exceedingly detailed.
>>
>> Last call for additional issues?
>>
>> Alan
>> ------
>> 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
>> ------
>>
>
>

------
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
------


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3209/6559 - Release Date: 08/08/13