Dear Izumi,
 
 I still cannot understand why you think that -
 
"If this Nomcom members are also representatives of RALO and hence from ALS, the very reason why we have Nomcom becomes undermined."
 
When the ICANN's Conflicts of Interest Policy [Adopted March 4, 1999, pursuant to ICANN Bylaws, Article V, Section 7, and Article VI, Section 3(b)] clearly lays down as follows:
 
"Purpose
The purpose of the Conflicts of Interest policy is to ensure that the deliberations and decisions of the Corporation are made in the interests of the global Internet community as a whole, and to protect the interests of the Corporation when it is contemplating entering into a transaction, contract, or arrangement that might benefit the private interest of an Interested Director, Officer or Person (as defined below). An Interested Director, Officer or Person may not use his or her position with respect to the Corporation, or confidential corporate information obtained by him or her relating to the Corporation, in order to achieve a financial benefit for himself or herself or for a third person, including another nonprofit or charitable organization. This policy is intended to supplement but not replace any applicable laws governing conflicts of interest in nonprofit and charitable corporations."
 
Thus the only conflict forbidden is financial interest which may conflict with the Nomcom position and no other. 
 
Needless to say, i see no conflict between the ICANN, ALAC and APRALO.
 
Regards,
 
Nirmol    


"Rajnesh D. Singh" <rajnesh@pacificit.org> wrote:
Forwarded to the list as per Izumi's request below.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] [Fwd: RE: NomCom 2008 Position]
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 23:18:47 +0900
From: Izumi AIZU
To: nirmol xxxx
CC: Bilal S. Beirm , rajnesh@pacificit.org,
Asia-Pacific Discuss
References: <8157321273FDDF4FBFED93102976F07F0F7409@mail.tago.org>
<838286.37890.qm@web812.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Dear all, I didn't realize my posting was bounced - maybe usgin gmail
with my original address was the reason... in that case, Rajnesh, could you
kindly forward this to the list?


And, as for what Nirmol wrote, honestly I could not understand
why exactly you could not agree with the explanation I wrote.
I did not write, or intended to say that anyone is partial.
I think and I thought each one is equally good including Siavash
who is not a member himself, but nominated by a member of
APRALO and seconded.

I would appreciate if someone, either NIrmol himsel and/or someone
who could understand what he wrote could explain that to me.

I do not see any "bias" in my own message or any other so far
except putting Siavash outside the candidate. I might be wrong,
and I am open and willing to know if that's the case.

Thanks,

izumi


2007/8/23, nirmol xxxx :
> dear all,
>
> I quite disagree with the explantion forwarded by Izumi.
>
> I dont understand why any one will be partial.
> What makes anyone think that a memeber of APRALO will be impartial.
> In that case it can be agrued that a non member would not as much be
> interested in the affairs as would a member be (no offence to Siavash).
>
> I think the explanation was totally uncalled for, taking into account the
> healthy functioning of the organisation so far.
>
> I think all of us have organised ourself into this organisation for a noble
> purpose and biases should not be interpreted unless they are capable of
> being substantiated, afterall APRALO, ALAC and ICANN have one objective in
> mind the development of healthy and futuristic policies for the benefit of
> the 'registered name holder' and the end user and any one capable of helping
> this objective is equal to another.
>
> No intention to be offensive to anyone but i think the mail was not in the
> spirit of consensus and hormony.
>
> God bless
> Nirmol
> ISVK India
>
>
> "Bilal S. Beirm" wrote:
> Agree with Izumi's comments.
>
> Bilal
> -----Original Message-----
> From: apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On
> Behalf Of Izumi
> AIZU
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 2:38 AM
> To: rajnesh@pacificit.org
> Cc: Asia-Pacific Discuss
> Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] [Fwd: RE: NomCom 2008 Position]
>
> In summary, I am OK with all THREE candidates, even though each seemed
> to have some minor process questions.
>
> I agree with Siavash and also Cheryl that NomCom position is not
> "representative of ALS", thus Siavash is perfect for candidate from
> ALAC to NomCom.
>
> If this NomCom members are also representative of RALO and hence from
> ALS, the very reason why we have NomCom
> becomes undermined. The intentionally setup NomCom outside the
> representation mechanism to keep sort of neutrality and wider
> governance in my understanding.
>
> I also like to remind that the final body to recommend the NomCom
> members is ALAC, not RALOs, globaly. So APRAL can make recommendations
> to ALAC, but we are not in the postion to make the FINAL decision.
>
> So, I woudl agree with Cheryl who just sent the list her suggestion to
> send all three candidates.
>
> Thanks,
>
> izumi
>
> 2007/8/23, Rajnesh D. Singh :
> > Note the following re: Nirmol's nomination.
> >
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: RE: [APAC-Discuss] NomCom 2008 Position
> > Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:59:51 +0800
> > From: Christopher To
> > To:
> > CC: Gary Soo
> > References: <46CBE1AB.9080503@pacificit.org>
> >
> >
> >
> > Rajnesh,
> >
> >
> >
> > The HKIF supports Nirmol Agarwal on this matter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Christopher
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > *From:* apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of
> > *Rajnesh D. Singh
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 22, 2007 3:12 PM
> > *To:* Asia-Pacific Discuss
> > *Subject:* [APAC-Discuss] NomCom 2008 Position
> >
> >
> >
> > Colleagues,
> >
> > The deadline for nominations has closed.
> >
> > We have 3 candidates nominated thus far, summarised below.
> >
> > **CANDIDATE**
> >
> >
> >
> > **NOMINATED BY**
> >
> >
> >
> > **ALS**
> >
> >
> >
> > **NOMINATION DATE**
> >
> > Nirmol Agarwal (ISVK)
> >
> >
> >
> > ISVK-India /
> >
> >
> >
> > ISVK-India /
> >
> >
> >
> > 14th August 2007
> >
> > Siavash Shahshahani (No ALS)
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheryl Langdon-Orr /
> >
> > Bilal Beiram
> >
> >
> >
> > ISOC-AU /
> >
> > AKMS
> >
> >
> >
> > 15th August 2007
> >
> > Karaitiana Taiuru (New Zealand Maori Internet Society)
> >
> >
> >
> > New Zealand Maori Internet Society /
> > Franck Martin
> >
> >
> >
> > New Zealand Maori Internet Society /
> >
> >
> >
> > 15th August 2007
> >
> >
> > Out of the above 3 candidates, 2 were self-nominations (Nirmol and
> > Karaitiana). Siavash has not indicated to the list that he has
> accepted
> > the nomination.
> >
> > At the Bali Meeting earlier this year, there was general consensus
> that
> > APRALO roles and functions would be handled by members from within
> ALS'.
> > If there was no interest from within ALS' then such roles and
> functions
> > could be offered to persons outside the ALS'. In this instance we have
> 2
> > persons representing ALS' interested in the position, and 1 person
> > nominated from outside the APRALO ALS'.
> >
> > If we stick to the consensus agreed to in Bali, then our preference
> must
> > be between Nirmol and Karaitiana.
> >
> > I now seek your guidance on reaching consensus on our candidate
> > nomination. The other options are to offer both candidates to ALAC and
> > let them pick one, or we vote and decide. Note that we need to reach
> > this decision by the end of this coming weekend.
> >
> > I look forward to your input.


_______________________________________________
APAC-Discuss mailing list
APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org