[At-Large] [ALAC] TR: ANNOUNCEMENT : Results from Round 2 voting for At-Large selected Board Member for seat #15 of ICANN Board

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Wed Dec 1 14:21:01 UTC 2010

At 01/12/2010 07:51 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

>On 30 November 2010 18:08, Alan Greenberg 
><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>Availability is not the only issue. If Sebastien participates to too
>great an extent on a particular issue, he may be seen to be in a
>conflict position and would have to recuse himself if that issue
>comes to the Board for discussion or decision.
>Are you really saying that great interest in an issue, and a deep 
>desire to understand the public attitude towards that issue (but 
>without any financial or organisational ties) constitutes a conflict 
>of interest?
>PLEASE tell me where to find that in the bylaws. I can't think of a 
>more fundamental A&T issue.
>I've always considered CoI to mean financial interest or, if defined 
>more broadly, attachment to an organization that has a financial or 
>regulatory relationship with ICANN. Until ICANN decides that it 
>needs to regulate the public, I can't think of any kind of public 
>consultation -- even a very high-profile one -- that would be 
>considered a CoI. If ICANN defines CoI that way, it is REALLY out of 
>touch and deliberately unaccountable in a way that is unacceptable.
>- Evan

I don't think that "interest and desire to understand" is any problem 
at all. Actually participating in the crafting of some proposal (or 
some similar involvement) *might* be. This is the same reason that 
Directors do not participate in the policy development process (and 
you may have noticed that the two Directors who signed up for the VI 
WG did so as "observers", and even then did not tend to participate.

In any case, this was an alert that I was given during the Director 
selection process, and I passed it on in this forum as a *possible* 


More information about the At-Large mailing list