[NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the election tie

[Alan Greenberg]

Note that the new Secretariat does not take 
office until November 21st, so we do not need to 
worry about an interim solution just yet.  Alan

At 02/08/2013 05:55 PM, Houle Louis wrote:
>+1
>
>Louis Houle
>Président
>La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec)
>Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org
>
>Le 2013-07-26 02:39, Eduardo Diaz a écrit :
>>I suggest a litle variation:
>>
>>Let both secretariat work in conjunction while the rules are changed and a
>>new vote is taken. If there ia another tie, then we can do as Evan has
>>suggested.
>>
>>-ed
>>
>>
>>On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Hello all,
>>>
>>>I would like to suggest conducting a poll of NARALO members on the best way
>>>to deal with the tie for Secretariat resulting from the recently-held vote.
>>>While we need to revise our regulations regarding tie-breaking, we have an
>>>immediate need to resolve the current situation before the next ICANN
>>>meeting.
>>>
>>>Based on discussions I have heard to date, there are three paths to
>>>resolving this that have received some interest:
>>>
>>>     1. Random tie-break
>>>     The votes for ALSs and unaffiliated members is re-held, and the rules
>>>     are modified. If another tie results, the tie is broken by a random
>>>method,
>>>     supervised by at least two non-candidate members and/or At-Large staff.
>>>
>>>     2. Tie-break by NA-Region ALAC members
>>>     The votes for ALSs and unaffiliated members is re-held and he rules are
>>>     modified. If another tie results, the tie is broken by a consensus
>>>achieved
>>>     in private by the three ALAC members for North America (Alan, Eduardo
>>>and
>>>     myself). Since there are three of us, no deadlock is allowed there
>>>
>>>     3. Shared Secretariat
>>>     No new election is held, and NARALO declares both Darlene and Glenn as
>>>     co-Secretariats. While there is no precedent for this in NARALO, there
>>>is
>>>     elsewhere in ICANN At-Large (both 
>>> co-Chair and co-Secretariats have been
>>>     done in other regions). The two would 
>>> alternate travel to ICANN meetings
>>>     (though both would naturally be at the Summit in London). In the case
>>>that
>>>     any of the North American At-Large leadership cannot attend a meeting
>>>     (Chair, travel-designated secretariat or ALAC member), the
>>>"non-travelling"
>>>     secretariat member would automatically be 
>>> designated to take that travel
>>>     allocation. The rules may still be modified in case of future ties, but
>>>     such action is not required immediately.
>>>
>>>So I am proposing that, in advance of the next NARALO call, we could do an
>>>informal poll of members (by Bigpulse or Doodle) to gain a sense of
>>>preferences between these options that may help guide a regional consensus
>>>on the August call.
>>>
>>>Is this a workable plan? Are the options above a valid representation of
>>>the ones discussed? (There are some other tie-break methods I have
>>>eliminated because of lack of support to date).
>>>
>>>I admit that when I started thinking about the tie I had not given any
>>>thought to the shared secretariat idea, but it has grown on me since. There
>>>is a significant amount of work to do, and it would be IMO a shame to force
>>>an all-or-nothing tiebreak on two people with both popular support and an
>>>eagerness to do the job.
>>>
>>>- Evan
>>>------
>>>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
>------