I sincerely *hope* so! and even though the poll will be anonymous (only staff will ever know who voted to allow for only 1 vote / ALS Member by one of the authorised delegates (for the purpose of voting ALSes are asked to identify up to 3) I'm happy to declare I'll be requesting and advising that my ALS vote against any postponement of the process now under-way and therefore against this later time line, even though it will at least accommodate 'some' of my concerns... *Cheryl Langdon-Orr ... **(CLO)* http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr On 5 May 2013 12:57, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
First - big thank you to Cheryl on timelines.
Next - to all:
On my reckoning, as on Cheryl's the total time for an ALAC election process is about six weeks. If the process is to be completed by the end of July, it must be started by mid June. So that leaves us with 4 weeks max - and let's please have a lesser time, just in case. That means that the nomination period should start by the end May. That gives us 2-3 weeks max to have a bit more information about ALAC and a webinar. Nomination period must start no later than 3 June - running to 24 June. One week later, the election starts - and is completed by 8 June -ending 15 July.
On my reckoning, that means time for information/webinar and time for NomCom.
Heidi/Silvia -
So please a slight modification to the proposed ballot. First - the paragraphs I proposed, using CLO and Rinalia's text, plus a rundown of dates (Please confirm mine are correct).
And yes, a very simple choice - yes, no, abstain.
I thin we're there
Holly
On 05/05/2013, at 11:35 AM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote:
Holly et.al any ALS rep who will bother to vote in the poll will also I trust have read the lists discussion but I have no issue with the type of introduction you propose... As long as the poll question is as simple as possible and allows for no ambiguity and leads to clear Yes, No or Abstain responses...
As to Rinalia's point on the awareness raising which I totally agree with for FUTURE years, IF her proposal for delay is agreed to, there will still only be a a few weeks to undertake this this year, there is the preference/request from the NomCom to have the ALAC RALO appointments declared in any given year BEFORE they enter their deliberations phase (so that various diversity issues can be taken into account during their deliberations and appointments) and to avoid the situation which has 'almost occurred' previously where a RALO and the NomCom was about to appoint the same person to a leadership role...
SO let me be REALLY CLEAR it is desirable that IF delayed *and I still see no need for that this time* your completion of the postponed process needs to be COMPLETED during July (as early as possible and absolutely by August remembering that by the beginning of August ALAC will need to announce its appointments for Regional representation to the 2014 NomCom as well and AP Region has to replace our current rep this year as Siranush has served her second term, so you will be running parallel competing and potentially confusing processes any way (which I gather was a primary concern originally raised by Rinalia) to advise the ALAC of any of your Regional or RALO suggestions of representative for them to consider during late June/early July as well...
Regarding the selection process a minimum of 21 days for nominations to the list should be held then an up to 7 day period is allowed for nominee acceptance after the close of nominations then if required any election is held no later than one week after the nominations and acceptance period ends and be completed no later than 2 weeks from that date. So 5-6 weeks is the period to commit for the selection process.
Rinalia refers to a process in two years time the process is an Annual one as ALAC reps serve 2 year terms but are appointed alternate years as are our APRALO Vice Chairs...
Re the terms details yes all the formal records show that the seating of the reps to ALAC happen at the End of the ICANN AGM each year whenever it falls (this can be any where between late Sept/early Oct and Nov/early Dec in a given year.... Holly your typo in your proposed intro re end of Sala's term would be rectified by the staff who have great expertise in these matters doing them for all the RALOs not just us...
Finally and not to any point made to date by Rinalia but as a consequence IF her proposal is supported, what will the status be of any nomination received in this current call, will they have standing? Are they simply put in stasis and reactivated at the beginning of the new call for nominations or are they null and void? AND what of a potential nominee who now knowing the opportunity for the ALAC role is current/pending and who is also nominated for the APRALO VC one? Should they not have the right to perhaps not accept or withdraw there acceptance for this role or to not accept IF they know they are going to contest for the ALAC one? etc., etc., Note there is NO impediment for someone who wishes to pursue both by the way, and in fact one can serve in both ALAC and as a RALO Officer (ones time management and ability to optimally perform, however does need to be considered carefully in this case, as considerable commitments are required for both roles)...
*Cheryl Langdon-Orr ... **(CLO)* http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr
On 5 May 2013 10:16, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
Hi Heidi et al
I'm not sure of the wording. I agree that the process - once started - it in effect interrupted. But some very cogent reasons have been argued on both sides. What I would like is an explanation on the pro and con so that people understand why there is an issue of substances and not just a disagreement. The text below that I am suggesting is taken from Cheryl's and Rinalia's emails (and both of you are welcome to change the wording - it is yours to start with).
So maybe first, a preamble putting both arguments. And then a call for a vote.
Thanks
Holly
*The wording could be something like:* * * *It is argued that the existing election process for an APRALO representative to the ALAC (noting that Sala's term expires at the end of June) in order to have the optimal transition of role between the existing and replacement of our representatives on the ALAC and noting that ICANN AGM meetings are often held in October rather than November as it incidentally is this year. It should also be noted that this call for selection of APRALO ALAC representation only* *overlaps with the close of the RALO Officer roles nomination period by 24+ hours. * * * *Alternatively, it is argued that the selection of the ALAC representatives requires a certain level of awareness-raising and exchanges regarding the ALAC role in terms of performance expectations, required skill and knowledge sets, workload coping mehanisms, etc. All of this needs to happen prior to the nomination process so that interested individuals have a good understanding of what it takes. The ALAC role requires adequate preparation. Otherwise there will be problems with coping and performing.*
Dear All,
Regarding the request for a poll on the APRALO ALAC Representative 2013-2015 selection schedule, could you please let Staff know if you wish to proceed with such a poll?
If so, please find some suggested text for the APRALO ALSes to vote upon below. It is also suggested that this vote be held for 72 hours with a launch to happen as soon as possible once we have heard back from all three of you (Holly, Fouad, and YJ).
Suggested text:
"It has been proposed by an ALS Member that the current selection schedule for the APRALO ALAC Representative 2013-2015 be interrupted and postponed. Do you agree?
- Yes - No - Abstain"
Regards,
Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen**** ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC**** E-mail: staff@atlarge.icann.org