The Board engaged in some discussion of the question of At-Large seat(s) on the Board but concluded that the time was not ripe for a formal resolution. The structural improvements group will continue to consider the matter of voting board seats in the context of the several ongoing reviews (At-Large, Board, and NomCom) to which it relates. I noted that ALAC and members had supported the concept of voting board seats at many meetings with the At-Large Review Working Group (although ALAC as a whole has not made a statement on the WG's report). Since this discussion is ongoing, it would be quite helpful for the At Large to give further comments on the matter of Board seat(s): If you want them, how do you see that interacting with the 5 at-large slots on the NomCom, board liaisons, and the Board Review's recommendation for a smaller board? How does At-Large see the director(s) being selected? --Wendy Wendy Seltzer wrote:
Alan Greenberg wrote:
Wendy, the following item is on the Board meeting scheduled for next week (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/agenda-21may09.htm). Can you comment on exactly what it is. I didn't think that the review report advocating such a seat(s) had been published or approved.
Agenda - For Action And/Or Discussion
6. Structural Improvements Committee Recommendations from Retreat - for discussion and possible action
b. At Large Seat
I believe the Structural Improvements Committee will be recommending in principle that At-Large be given the right to select one or more voting directors. The Board as a whole has not yet discussed the subject. If members have points you'd like me to raise (as well as those already in ALAC statements), please let me know.
--Wendy
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Professor, American University Washington College of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/