Re: [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
I hate to disagree with my friend Tijani on this. In this case we are extending the mantle of the ALAC's standing in the ICANN community to an At-Large Structure. Current institutional arrangements and the configuration is that at least ten (10) ALAC members are supposed to be reflecting their sense of ALS positions to ALAC and thence, to the Board and community. If an ALAC member cannot vote and publicly justify one's vote then that member is unworthy of being an ALAC member. Mark me down as unanimous on that. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tijani BENJEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote:
Dear Alan,
Unfortunately, I didn’t attend the last ALAC call. I do appreciate that this issue was brought to the table.
I do think that the ALS certification and decertification votes should be conducted as confidential votes to avoid any tension or harassment. Even staff and the ALAC chair shouldn’t know how ALAC Members voted. We may ask voters to give the rational of their vote, but anonymously.
My fear is that when the ALAC members cast their votes knowing that there will be someone (staff and ALAC Chair) who will see how they voted, they will not vote according to their conscience, they will modulate their choice according the relationship they think staff members and ALAC Chair have with the concerned ALS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: + 216 41 649 605
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
Fax: + 216 70 853 376
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
-----Message d'origine----- De : alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : jeudi 2 octobre 2014 14:37 À : ALAC Objet : [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
On our last ALAC call, Olivier brought up the subject of whether ALS
certification and decertification votes should use secret ballots
(such as we used for personnel votes) or not, and it was decided to
discuss the issue on the mailing list.
The history is that most ALAC votes are open and it is disclosed who
voted which way, with the exception of personnel votes and others
that the ALAC explicitly decides should be secret. We have made such
a decision of rare occasions. The only example I can recall is when
we voted on whether to file objections to the .health new TLDs and we
did so to avoid any harassment of ALAC members who voted for such objections.
A couple of years ago, a change was made to certification and
decertification votes to change them from open to closed because of
one or more objections filed by applicants. There is also a concern
that a rejected application could lead to harassment of those who
rejected it, and a concern that people might not vote honestly if the
result was public (similar to the reason for secret ballots on
personnel votes).
I think that this concern should be considered.
However, under our rules and the ICANN Bylaws, ALS certification and
decertification decisions may be appealed to the Board. As such, we
should be in a position to explain why a decision was made.
Accordingly I offer the following proposal.
ALS certification votes shall be conducted in such a way that there
will be no public disclosure of how ALAC Members voted. However, the
details of how ALAC Members voted will be available to ICANN At-Large
staff and the ALAC Chair to allow them to conduct private interviews
with voters to be able to put together a rationale for why any
particular decision was made.
Comments?
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA C)
--- Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Current institutional arrangements and the
configuration is that at least ten (10) ALAC members are supposed to be reflecting their sense of ALS positions to ALAC and thence, to the Board and community.
If an ALAC member cannot vote and publicly justify one's vote then that member is unworthy of being an ALAC member.
Mark me down as unanimous on that.
-Carlton
++++1 Carlton and Sandra
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tijani BENJEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn
wrote:
Dear Alan,
Unfortunately, I didn't attend the last ALAC call. I do appreciate that this issue was brought to the table.
I do think that the ALS certification and decertification votes should be conducted as confidential votes to avoid any tension or harassment. Even staff and the ALAC chair shouldn't know how ALAC Members voted. We may ask voters to give the rational of their vote, but anonymously.
My fear is that when the ALAC members cast their votes knowing that there will be someone (staff and ALAC Chair) who will see how they voted, they will not vote according to their conscience, they will modulate their choice according the relationship they think staff members and ALAC Chair have with the concerned ALS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: + 216 41 649 605
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
Fax: + 216 70 853 376
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
-----Message d'origine----- De : alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : jeudi 2 octobre 2014 14:37 À : ALAC Objet : [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
On our last ALAC call, Olivier brought up the subject of whether ALS
certification and decertification votes should use secret ballots
(such as we used for personnel votes) or not, and it was decided to
discuss the issue on the mailing list.
The history is that most ALAC votes are open and it is disclosed who
voted which way, with the exception of personnel votes and others
that the ALAC explicitly decides should be secret. We have made such
a decision of rare occasions. The only example I can recall is when
we voted on whether to file objections to the .health new TLDs and we
did so to avoid any harassment of ALAC members who voted for such objections.
A couple of years ago, a change was made to certification and
decertification votes to change them from open to closed because of
one or more objections filed by applicants. There is also a concern
that a rejected application could lead to harassment of those who
rejected it, and a concern that people might not vote honestly if the
result was public (similar to the reason for secret ballots on
personnel votes).
I think that this concern should be considered.
However, under our rules and the ICANN Bylaws, ALS certification and
decertification decisions may be appealed to the Board. As such, we
should be in a position to explain why a decision was made.
Accordingly I offer the following proposal.
ALS certification votes shall be conducted in such a way that there
will be no public disclosure of how ALAC Members voted. However, the
details of how ALAC Members voted will be available to ICANN At-Large
staff and the ALAC Chair to allow them to conduct private interviews
with voters to be able to put together a rationale for why any
particular decision was made.
Comments?
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C)
--- Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
@Sandra +1. Jean-Jacques. ----- Mail original ----- De: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> À: "Carlton Samuels" <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Cc: "ALAC" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Envoyé: Samedi 4 Octobre 2014 10:37:17 Objet: Re: [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes Current institutional arrangements and the
configuration is that at least ten (10) ALAC members are supposed to be reflecting their sense of ALS positions to ALAC and thence, to the Board and community.
If an ALAC member cannot vote and publicly justify one's vote then that member is unworthy of being an ALAC member.
Mark me down as unanimous on that.
-Carlton
++++1 Carlton and Sandra
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tijani BENJEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn
wrote:
Dear Alan,
Unfortunately, I didn't attend the last ALAC call. I do appreciate that this issue was brought to the table.
I do think that the ALS certification and decertification votes should be conducted as confidential votes to avoid any tension or harassment. Even staff and the ALAC chair shouldn't know how ALAC Members voted. We may ask voters to give the rational of their vote, but anonymously.
My fear is that when the ALAC members cast their votes knowing that there will be someone (staff and ALAC Chair) who will see how they voted, they will not vote according to their conscience, they will modulate their choice according the relationship they think staff members and ALAC Chair have with the concerned ALS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: + 216 41 649 605
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
Fax: + 216 70 853 376
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
-----Message d'origine----- De : alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : jeudi 2 octobre 2014 14:37 À : ALAC Objet : [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
On our last ALAC call, Olivier brought up the subject of whether ALS
certification and decertification votes should use secret ballots
(such as we used for personnel votes) or not, and it was decided to
discuss the issue on the mailing list.
The history is that most ALAC votes are open and it is disclosed who
voted which way, with the exception of personnel votes and others
that the ALAC explicitly decides should be secret. We have made such
a decision of rare occasions. The only example I can recall is when
we voted on whether to file objections to the .health new TLDs and we
did so to avoid any harassment of ALAC members who voted for such objections.
A couple of years ago, a change was made to certification and
decertification votes to change them from open to closed because of
one or more objections filed by applicants. There is also a concern
that a rejected application could lead to harassment of those who
rejected it, and a concern that people might not vote honestly if the
result was public (similar to the reason for secret ballots on
personnel votes).
I think that this concern should be considered.
However, under our rules and the ICANN Bylaws, ALS certification and
decertification decisions may be appealed to the Board. As such, we
should be in a position to explain why a decision was made.
Accordingly I offer the following proposal.
ALS certification votes shall be conducted in such a way that there
will be no public disclosure of how ALAC Members voted. However, the
details of how ALAC Members voted will be available to ICANN At-Large
staff and the ALAC Chair to allow them to conduct private interviews
with voters to be able to put together a rationale for why any
particular decision was made.
Comments?
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C)
--- Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
What if we say that all votes are open but, in those cases where there is a concern in voting openly, it gets discussed to reach consensus in ALAC as to whether in the specific case it goes secret or semi-secret. In other words, the default is that every vote is open except if someone requests not to be so and then, at that time, ALAC decides by consensus if the vote goes secret or whatever. -ed On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <jjs@dyalog.net> wrote:
@Sandra +1. Jean-Jacques.
----- Mail original ----- De: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> À: "Carlton Samuels" <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Cc: "ALAC" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "Alan Greenberg" < alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Envoyé: Samedi 4 Octobre 2014 10:37:17 Objet: Re: [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
Current institutional arrangements and the
configuration is that at least ten (10) ALAC members are supposed to be reflecting their sense of ALS positions to ALAC and thence, to the Board and community.
If an ALAC member cannot vote and publicly justify one's vote then that member is unworthy of being an ALAC member.
Mark me down as unanimous on that.
-Carlton
++++1 Carlton and Sandra
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tijani BENJEMAA <
tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn
wrote:
Dear Alan,
Unfortunately, I didn't attend the last ALAC call. I do appreciate that this issue was brought to the table.
I do think that the ALS certification and decertification votes should be conducted as confidential votes to avoid any tension or harassment. Even staff and the ALAC chair shouldn't know how ALAC Members voted. We may ask voters to give the rational of their vote, but anonymously.
My fear is that when the ALAC members cast their votes knowing that there will be someone (staff and ALAC Chair) who will see how they voted, they will not vote according to their conscience, they will modulate their choice according the relationship they think staff members and ALAC Chair have with the concerned ALS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: + 216 41 649 605
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
Fax: + 216 70 853 376
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
-----Message d'origine----- De : alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : jeudi 2 octobre 2014 14:37 À : ALAC Objet : [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
On our last ALAC call, Olivier brought up the subject of whether ALS
certification and decertification votes should use secret ballots
(such as we used for personnel votes) or not, and it was decided to
discuss the issue on the mailing list.
The history is that most ALAC votes are open and it is disclosed who
voted which way, with the exception of personnel votes and others
that the ALAC explicitly decides should be secret. We have made such
a decision of rare occasions. The only example I can recall is when
we voted on whether to file objections to the .health new TLDs and we
did so to avoid any harassment of ALAC members who voted for such objections.
A couple of years ago, a change was made to certification and
decertification votes to change them from open to closed because of
one or more objections filed by applicants. There is also a concern
that a rejected application could lead to harassment of those who
rejected it, and a concern that people might not vote honestly if the
result was public (similar to the reason for secret ballots on
personnel votes).
I think that this concern should be considered.
However, under our rules and the ICANN Bylaws, ALS certification and
decertification decisions may be appealed to the Board. As such, we
should be in a position to explain why a decision was made.
Accordingly I offer the following proposal.
ALS certification votes shall be conducted in such a way that there
will be no public disclosure of how ALAC Members voted. However, the
details of how ALAC Members voted will be available to ICANN At-Large
staff and the ALAC Chair to allow them to conduct private interviews
with voters to be able to put together a rationale for why any
particular decision was made.
Comments?
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C)
--- Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
-- *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Ed this sounds like a better option to me because then an ALAC member has to have good reasons to justify a secret vote. Best Sandra (Note: This message was send from my iPhone - I do apologise for any misspelling.)
Am 05.10.2014 um 17:41 schrieb Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com>:
What if we say that all votes are open but, in those cases where there is a concern in voting openly, it gets discussed to reach consensus in ALAC as to whether in the specific case it goes secret or semi-secret. In other words, the default is that every vote is open except if someone requests not to be so and then, at that time, ALAC decides by consensus if the vote goes secret or whatever.
-ed
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <jjs@dyalog.net> wrote:
@Sandra +1. Jean-Jacques.
----- Mail original ----- De: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> À: "Carlton Samuels" <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Cc: "ALAC" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "Alan Greenberg" < alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Envoyé: Samedi 4 Octobre 2014 10:37:17 Objet: Re: [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
Current institutional arrangements and the
configuration is that at least ten (10) ALAC members are supposed to be reflecting their sense of ALS positions to ALAC and thence, to the Board and community.
If an ALAC member cannot vote and publicly justify one's vote then that member is unworthy of being an ALAC member.
Mark me down as unanimous on that.
-Carlton ++++1 Carlton and Sandra
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tijani BENJEMAA <
tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn
wrote:
Dear Alan,
Unfortunately, I didn't attend the last ALAC call. I do appreciate that this issue was brought to the table.
I do think that the ALS certification and decertification votes should be conducted as confidential votes to avoid any tension or harassment. Even staff and the ALAC chair shouldn't know how ALAC Members voted. We may ask voters to give the rational of their vote, but anonymously.
My fear is that when the ALAC members cast their votes knowing that there will be someone (staff and ALAC Chair) who will see how they voted, they will not vote according to their conscience, they will modulate their choice according the relationship they think staff members and ALAC Chair have with the concerned ALS.
----
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: + 216 41 649 605
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
Fax: + 216 70 853 376
----
-----Message d'origine----- De : alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : jeudi 2 octobre 2014 14:37 À : ALAC Objet : [ALAC] ALS certification and decertification votes
On our last ALAC call, Olivier brought up the subject of whether ALS
certification and decertification votes should use secret ballots
(such as we used for personnel votes) or not, and it was decided to
discuss the issue on the mailing list.
The history is that most ALAC votes are open and it is disclosed who
voted which way, with the exception of personnel votes and others
that the ALAC explicitly decides should be secret. We have made such
a decision of rare occasions. The only example I can recall is when
we voted on whether to file objections to the .health new TLDs and we
did so to avoid any harassment of ALAC members who voted for such objections.
A couple of years ago, a change was made to certification and
decertification votes to change them from open to closed because of
one or more objections filed by applicants. There is also a concern
that a rejected application could lead to harassment of those who
rejected it, and a concern that people might not vote honestly if the
result was public (similar to the reason for secret ballots on
personnel votes).
I think that this concern should be considered.
However, under our rules and the ICANN Bylaws, ALS certification and
decertification decisions may be appealed to the Board. As such, we
should be in a position to explain why a decision was made.
Accordingly I offer the following proposal.
ALS certification votes shall be conducted in such a way that there
will be no public disclosure of how ALAC Members voted. However, the
details of how ALAC Members voted will be available to ICANN At-Large
staff and the ALAC Chair to allow them to conduct private interviews
with voters to be able to put together a rationale for why any
particular decision was made.
Comments?
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA C)
--- Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
-- *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
participants (5)
-
Carlton Samuels -
Eduardo Diaz -
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro -
sandra hoferichter -
Subrenat, Jean-Jacques