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

Skuce, Allan allan.skuce at homesociety.ca
Sat Jul 27 15:37:50 UTC 2013


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] 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
> > 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
> > ------
>
> ------
> 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
> ------
>


More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list