[NA-Discuss] Building consensus on dealing with the election tie
Gordon Chillcott
gordontc at look.ca
Wed Jul 31 21:12:30 UTC 2013
After some thought, I' for another vote as well.
Gordon
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 15:43 -0400, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:
> +1
>
> On 7/31/2013 3:19 PM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> > I'm with Eduardo. Another vote.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Eduardo Diaz
> > <eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> I will go for another vote. If there is another draw, then the three ALAC
> >> 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] 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] 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 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
> >>>>> ------
> >>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 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
> >>>> 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
> >>> ------
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or
> >> subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named
> >> addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use,
> >> disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by
> >> mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
> >> ------
> >> 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