Re: [ALAC] [At-Large] TR: ANNOUNCEMENT : Results from Round 2 voting for At-Large selected Board Member for seat #15 of ICANN Board
Availability is not the only issue. If Sebastien participates to too great an extent on a particular issue, he may be seen to be in a conflict position and would have to recuse himself if that issue comes to the Board for discussion or decision. Then At-Large would lose both their liaison and voting Board member on just the issue that is of importance to them. Alan At 30/11/2010 05:08 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
As far as the issue of Liaison ... Just because you are no longer an official voting member of ALAC does not prevent you participating in it to the extent of your availability.
- Evan
On 30 November 2010 18:08, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Availability is not the only issue. If Sebastien participates to too great an extent on a particular issue, he may be seen to be in a conflict position and would have to recuse himself if that issue comes to the Board for discussion or decision.
Are you really saying that great interest in an issue, and a deep desire to understand the public attitude towards that issue (but without any financial or organisational ties) constitutes a conflict of interest? PLEASE tell me where to find that in the bylaws. I can't think of a more fundamental A&T issue. I've always considered CoI to mean financial interest or, if defined more broadly, attachment to an organization that has a financial or regulatory relationship with ICANN. Until ICANN decides that it needs to regulate the public, I can't think of any kind of public consultation -- even a very high-profile one -- that would be considered a CoI. If ICANN defines CoI that way, it is REALLY out of touch and deliberately unaccountable in a way that is unacceptable. - Evan
participants (2)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Evan Leibovitch