At 24/04/2009 01:45 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Alan Greenberg wrote:
I agree that having a Liaison in addition to voting member(s) would be optimal, but I do not see this being viewed as acceptable. The phrase "having your cake and eating it" comes to mind. And if it were a valid concept for us, it would apply to the SO as well. Given that there is pressure to shrink the size of the Board, I don't think that it is a likely scenario. As long as we can find a mechanism where the At-Large Board member(s) share values with the ALAC, I think it puts us on an equal footing with the rest of ICANN, and that is about as much as we can expect. I agree, and I am quite comfortable with the ALAC Review recommendation as-is.
The reps sent by ALAC to the Board could not be expected to be fully accountable once chosen, but ALAC can (and should) do its best due diligence to ensure that the people who are selected understand and share the sensibilities and goals of At-Large.
The reps should IMO also be accepted as ex-officio members of ALAC -- perhaps able to vote on internal ALAC issues.
- Evan
Thanks Evan. Your main paragraph captures what I was trying to say. Once on the Board, the person is indeed a free agent. But you want to try to pick a person that, will espouse the same values and intents of the larger group - a group that of course, may not be of a single mind on many issues. My worry if the process is too focused at the ALS level and not sufficiently including the RALO leadership and ALAC, that there may be a significant split between THAT group (the ones that are ultimately charged with meeting ALAC commitments and targets) and the Board member. Essentially, I am saying that if selection of the Board member becomes a popularity contest, we may be in trouble. Your last paragraph is interesting and will require additional discussion. I have not really looked into the issue of whether a current Board member can still sit on a SO. Without checking, I suspect that the current rules do not forbid it, but that most resign from their original post as they cannot be expected to fulfill those obligations at the same time as being a board member. If this recommendation does ultimately get approved by the Board, we will have to act quickly to put a process in place, so I thank you for kicking off the discussion. Alan