Dear Kavouss, I agree with you, and I think with most if not all, that it would be silly (and very counterproductive) to recall the whole board if one or two (a few) of its members of it are underperforming. First of all, there would be a „safety catch”: there would never be a supermajority for such a proposal (to recall the whole board just for one or a few poor performers). And rightly so, because one or two underperforming members would hardly in any significant way prevent the proper functioning of the board as a whole. The point I tried to make in today’s call, is that the board itself presently has the power to dismiss one or more of its members. It seems nobody can recall the board ever using that power. Very likely they never have. Very likely too, they have threatened a former member or two to do so if they would stand for reelection/reappointment after their first term or not quit by themselves.. So if the board feels (or the community convinces them) that one or more under performers actually are preventing the board from properly functioning, they would surely (especially with the option looming of the whole board being recalled by the community) dismiss the underperformers. In the unthinkable situation that 1) a single or multiple board member(s) perform so poorly that the board as a whole can no longer function properly 2) the board fails to recognize that and/or fails to take action 3) the community recognizes that and stands ready to spill the whole board with a supermajority vote: a recall of the entire board is wholly justified in my opinion, as the board’s inaction indicates bad performance of the majority of the board. Best, Roelof From: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> Date: dinsdag 3 maart 2015 17:27 To: Roelof Meijer <roelof.meijer@sidn.nl<mailto:roelof.meijer@sidn.nl>> Cc: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>>, "wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org>" <wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Party1] template - removal of ICANN directors - draft 1 Dear All, It is an interesting subject. This is the second time that I have noted that people are just for recalling the entire Board even if every one except one or two members fail to discharge their responsibilities. Unless specifically stipulated in the Bylaw that the entire Board is collectively responsible for their collegial Performance and also responsible for individual actions one can not recall the whole Board if only one member fails to act properly Kavouss Sent from my iPhone On 3 Mar 2015, at 13:09, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl<mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl>> wrote: Dear Robin, I am not too comfortable with the distinction you seem to make between noncom appointees on the board („representing the entire community in the first instance”) and members elected from SO’s and AC’s (other). We assessed that all board members first of all serve the public interest and secondly ICANN the corporation. So if in the end, the options will be to recall the board or part thereof, in my opinion the process for all board members should be the same. (However, as I stated before, I am in favor of the options being recalling the whole board on not recalling the board). That said, what kind of process do you envisage for „NomCom appointees should be recalled by the entire community”? Cheers, Roelof From: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Date: maandag 2 maart 2015 21:03 To: "wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org>" <wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Party1] template - removal of ICANN directors - draft 1 I think the community would want other options than only via a representative vote to spill the board. My own community would want a more directly democratic or bottom-up approach, i.e., our members would vote for themselves (rather than through a representative vote) for NCSG's vote in the question of whether to spill the board. NomCom appointees should be recalled by the entire community since that is who they should be representative of in the first instance. Thanks, Robin On Mar 1, 2015, at 2:47 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote: Just did a quick review of the inventory of accountability suggestions over last several months. All commenters talked about removing all directors, or as we say, ‘spill the board’. Only two mentioned ‘one or all’ directors. I think we are far better focusing on a mechanisms that lets a supermajority of Community representatives vote to spill the entire board. I’d even say it should be a 3/4 supermajority. From: Matthew Shears Date: Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:33 PM To: Jordan Carter, "wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org>" Subject: Re: [Party1] template - removal of ICANN directors - draft 1 Hi Jordan Just wondering w/r/t this: the decision would have to arise out of democratic decisions of various SOs/ACs What about those Directors who are selected by the NomCom (not selected by any particular community)? Would it make any difference? Matthew On 2/28/2015 8:43 AM, Jordan Carter wrote: Dear WP1 members I've had a go at item 7a in our work listing, the mechanism of removing ICANN directors. Attached is my first draft of that paper for your review and comment. I've kept it pretty simple, with the power basically being given to whatever mechanism we design to represent "the community". ICANN staff, could you turn this into a Google doc, and post on the Wiki? Thanks all, look forward to your thoughts. cheers Jordan -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive InternetNZ 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz> Skype: jordancarter A better world through a better Internet _______________________________________________ WP1 mailing list WP1@icann.org<mailto:WP1@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1 _______________________________________________ WP1 mailing list WP1@icann.org<mailto:WP1@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1 _______________________________________________ WP1 mailing list WP1@icann.org<mailto:WP1@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1