Dear Alan: Related to the second comment, I don´t have a different vision than yours in this. Regards, Andrés Piazza LACRALO Chair -----Mensaje original----- De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Alan Greenberg Enviado el: miércoles, 15 de julio de 2009 12:10 a.m. Para: ALAC Working List Asunto: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July Two comments: At 14/07/2009 07:49 PM, carlos aguirre wrote:
Another Question: Why EX Comm is currently formed by Nom Comm appointees, and no by RALO representatives?, Nom Comm appointees are better user representatives than RALO representatives? I don`t think so.
First, my understanding is that both Cheryl and Sébastien are elected by their RALOs and are not NomCom appointees. Second, all four officers positions were filled by candidates who were not opposed - two from RALOs, two from NomCom. And if they had been opposed, whoever was elected would have been selected by the majority of voters, as democracy dictates. NomCom appointees are not de facto better user representatives than RALO representatives, but perhaps not de facto worse either. At 14/07/2009 08:19 PM, Andres Piazza wrote:
About the last part, I don´t think that anyone could disagree with, for example, ALAN´s words. But this is not an easy matter to raise. Firstly, because some of the analysis are made in quantity matters, but not with a complete vision. I share many of the comments but be carefull, who is who to be jugdamental to the performance of other ALAC Members?
Specially RALO Leaders! Are we in a position to say something so strongly about ALAC Members from our region? The whole RALO elected them, not just ourselves. And also, they or some other person could also come with some criticism with the role of one of us, RALO leaders. And they could use many different criteria to analyze that (for example: "What are RALO Leaders from that region that hardly can encourage 1 or 2 ALS rep to be involved in remote participation during the meeting?. I put this example because FOR ME, in LACRALO, a lot of work is done in private emails, chats, calls, with members from the region to encourage, answer doubts, and etc etc, more that to be in some particular WG providing what is just my personal opinion). I could continue the whole night providing examples, but is not the sense.
I´m not saying that this "performance discussion" shouldn´t be raised, but just to be careful and not to put this as an argument against other idea that has been displayed.
I guess we may have a different vision here. In my mind, RALO leaders are elected by their ALSs to take responsibility for their RALO. That is what leadership is all about. I agree that this is potentially a very difficult job. It is not easy to formally assess performance in cases such as this, and particularly when the person being assessed is a colleague. But that is the job that RALO leaders have been given, and they must use all of their skills to try to understand how effective their ALAC representatives are. And they will no doubt have to talk to other ALAC members to try to make this assessment. It is important (in my mind) to differentiate between someone who is working effectively within the RALO, and someone who is working well within the ALAC. You can have one without the other (in both directions). So should we be careful in both setting up the rules and then carrying them out? Most certainly! But ignoring the responsibility should not be one of the options. Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.14/2238 - Release Date: 07/14/09 18:03:00