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

Houle Louis Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org
Sun Aug 4 22:59:15 UTC 2013


Hola Eduardo,

We are expecting Alan to come back with a proposal!
Which is a good thing and thanks to Alan!
Glenn mentions that he's more or less comfortable with sharing the 
secretariat for understandable reasons.
Evan proposed different and reasonable solutions. They have been discussed.
I must agree with you that a new draw is the next step!
I'm a bit concerned about the process to break it if needed!


Louis Houle
Président
La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec)
Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org

Le 2013-08-04 11:02, Eduardo Diaz a écrit :
> Louis:
>
> I do not know. However the idea is that if there is another draw there will
> be a process in place to break it.
>
> -ed
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Houle Louis <Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org>wrote:
>
>> Hola Edouardo,
>>
>> Will a new vote change the result?
>>
>> Louis Houle
>> Présidentwould like to have a shared
>>
>> La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec)
>> Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org
>>
>> Le 2013-07-31 09:44, Eduardo Diaz a écrit :
>>
>>> I will go for another vote. If there is another draw, then the three
>>> ALACnew vote
>>>
>>> members from the region will move into action. However, since this not in
>>> any rules we should reach consensus on this (on any other solution) before
>>> executing. I do not believe sharing is a good option.
>>>
>>> -ed
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson1 at gov.nu.ca
>>>> wrote:
>>>   Ah, good question Alan,
>>>> As we have been discussing for a while, there are quite a few areas in
>>>> our
>>>> Rules of Procedure that need to be updated.  So, I am thinking that if we
>>>> put a lot of time into a robust set of rules for this one matter, then we
>>>> will have to address all of the other matters later.  This will prolong
>>>> the
>>>> discussions on the list interminably on procedural matters.  This would
>>>> be
>>>> a real distraction from the actual policy work that the NARALO should be
>>>> focusing on.  For that reason, I would be more in favour of dealing with
>>>> changes to the RoP all at once.  So, I am leaning towards getting this
>>>> election over with and then a small subset can concentrate on re-drafting
>>>> the RoP for the NARALO's consideration while the rest of the group can
>>>> continue with important policy work.
>>>>
>>>> I am also seeing now that the problem with option #3 - sharing of work -
>>>> could be problematic if one of the candidates has no desire to do so.
>>>>   The
>>>> RALO cannot really force this.  The Rules of Procedure already ALLOW for
>>>> it, so perhaps we need to have an either/or going forward.  IF the tied
>>>> parties agree to work together, allow it.  If not, then option #1 (random
>>>> selection) or #2 (vote by NARALO ALAC members) should be undertaken.
>>>>   This
>>>> would have to be something that the group would need to decide on prior
>>>> to
>>>> re-holding the election although most seem to be leaning towards #2.
>>>>
>>>> I have already indicated my preferences in the above, so this is
>>>> something
>>>> that the group needs to decide.
>>>>
>>>> D
>>>>
>>>> Darlene A. Thompson
>>>> CAP Administrator
>>>> 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: Alan Greenberg [alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca]
>>>> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 3:50 PM
>>>> To: Thompson, Darlene; Bob Bruen; Thomas Lowenhaupt
>>>> Cc: NARALO Discussion List
>>>> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the
>>>>   election
>>>> tie
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Darlene. There is no question that we need a obust set of
>>>> rules that can handle situations such as this. The only immediate
>>>> question, as I outlined in my earlier note, is do we need them for
>>>> THIS election.
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> At 27/07/2013 03:18 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thank you Bob,
>>>>>
>>>>> Along this line, when NARALO was still new and nobody really knew
>>>>> what they were doing, Luc and I did just fine sharing
>>>>> responsibilities.  We e-mailed back and forth a lot and just decided
>>>>> between us who would do what.  It was pretty easy.
>>>>>
>>>>> NARALO has now grown a lot, as have the people within it.  Each
>>>>> person brings their own talents and skills to the table.  I think
>>>>> that Glenn and my talents are diverse enough that we should be able
>>>>> to divvy up the workload and actually be able to grow more
>>>>> initiatives for the region - each taking the lead in what they
>>>>> prefer or where their skills are.  I am quite flexible and would, of
>>>>> course, do everything I can to make it work - as I always do.  I do
>>>>> not think that we need the job to be "codified" as it is constantly
>>>>> changing as per the needs of the group.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having said that, I would also be in favour of the tie-breaker
>>>>> solution offered by the 3 ALAC members but my preference will always
>>>>> be to try to grow and expand the talent pool in the region.
>>>>>
>>>>> D
>>>>>
>>>>> Darlene A. Thompson
>>>>> CAP Administrator
>>>>> 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>
>>>>> [na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-**lists.icann.org<na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>]
>>>>> on behalf of Bob Bruen
>>>>> [bruen at coldrain.net]
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:24 PM
>>>>> To: Thomas Lowenhaupt
>>>>> Cc: NARALO Discussion List
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the
>>>>> election
>>>>>
>>>> tie
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Darlene has been at this job for long enough to know what to do. I
>>>>> expect
>>>>> that she and Glenn could figure out how to share the responsibilities,
>>>>> then let us know. They are both reasonable adults. If there is a
>>>>> problem,
>>>>> I am sure the Chair could be helpful in settling it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>                 --bob
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   I think the shared responsibility can work. But we must define specific
>>>>>> responsibilities and metrics for each co-secretary.  These metrics
>>>>>>
>>>>> will be
>>>>> quite helpful when the next election comes along, at least in
>>>>> evaluating the
>>>>>
>>>>>> performance of the cos.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom Lowenhaupt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/27/2013 11:37 AM, Skuce, Allan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I still prefer #3. What an opportunity to grow, lead by example, and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> deal
>>>>> with the great workload. Cheers, Allan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Dharma Dailey
>>>>>>> <dharma.dailey at gmail.com>**wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Have we reached clarity on whether folks feel the job can be shared?
>>>>>>>    The
>>>>>   last message from Glenn, I recall, was along the lines of  "looking
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>   it."  It might be easier on all parties if some of the details were
>>>>>>>> discussed before hand so no one is surprised re: who is doing what.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dharma
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2013, at 6:44 PM, "Thompson, Darlene" <
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DThompson1 at GOV.NU.CA>
>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>>>   Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> I would like to encourage all NARALO members to consider the options
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that Evan has posited below and respond to same.  Without consensus
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>   cannot move forward on this issue.
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your time on this!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> D
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Darlene A. Thompson
>>>>>>>>> CAP Administrator
>>>>>>>>> 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>[
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-**lists.icann.org<na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>]
>>>>>>>> on behalf of Evan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Leibovitch [
>>>>>> evan at telly.org]
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 4:44 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: NARALO Discussion List
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> election tie
>>>>>>   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<NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   ------
>>>>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>>>>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.**icann.org<NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   --
>>>>> Dr. Robert Bruen
>>>>> Cold Rain Labs
>>>>> http://coldrain.net/bruen
>>>>> +1.802.579.6288
>>>>>
>>>>> ------
>>>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>>>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.**icann.org<NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<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<NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<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<NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>
>>>>
>>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>



More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list