Danny I have been out for personal reasons for the past 3 weeks, but am now back and catching back up. I do not understand your complaint about "removing candidates from the election roster" The RALOs were consulted for names. The ALAC did not bind itself to choose ONLY from those names or from ALL the names submitted by the RALO ... that was the role of the regional ALAC members - each region's ALAC MEMBERS submitted names to the ALAC, and THOSE names submitted by them constituted the "electoral roster". (Some took the RALO names, some took RALO names and other suggestions, some took some of the RALO names, left out some and added other suggestions.) All perfectly legal. RALOs are newly formed and we are working to adjust the ALAC processes to include RALO input. However I have seen a lot that some RALOs (not necessarily NARALO, so don't get in a snit) are VERY active when it comes to ALAC procedures, but NOT AT ALL ACTIVE when it comes to the REASON we are here in the first place - ICANN POLICY. But as I keep saying ( but people seem not to understand or read my emails?) is that RALOs have things to do, ALAC has things to do, and they are not the same, and the RALOs are not to take over ALAC's role, nor is ALAC to take the RALOs role. Everyone has responsibilities, and it would work so much better if we agreed on those responsibilities and then did the job rather than insulting and abusing people who were actually doing what they were mandated to do! The term "electoral roster" is also kind of weird to me, as voting isn't mandated, it is often done in ALAC when we fail to reach consensus, or sometimes for other reasons. ALAC voted, cause we have a voting tool and as has happened in the past - we've done consensus, we've done voting. So - if you disagree with Robert - if NARALO has a process for recall, you can engage it. You can also request a change in the NARALO rules (but I would not at all recommend taking the LACRALO ones in toto as they are highly restrictive, and I think would dissuade a lot of good people from running for the position), you can get your reps to suggest a change in the ALAC rules... there are many things you can do without insulting staff, ALAC, our Board Liaison, and the nominees to the NomCom, who I am sure are all good and intelligent people who will do well. If not, we pick differently next year! I would like to suggest that we all move on to more substantive issues - lots of things need to be done for LA which is almost upon us. -----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 11:58 To: Wendy Seltzer Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Results of the Voting for ALAC NominatingCommittee 2008 Appointments Wendy, As Robert on the NCUC list has revealed that you were one of the parties consulted in a process that led to the removal of a candidate from the voting roster, I can understand why you might wish to bury the issue. Sorry, but electoral fraud, an illegal interference with the process of an election, is a serious matter that can't just be swept under the carpet like it never happened. Removing a candidate from the roster for no legitimate reason is illegal interference. It should not be condoned on the pretext of needing to move on. regards, Danny --- Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com> wrote:
Danny,
As you have always been one of the strongest voices in counseling us to focus on policy rather than infighting, I hope you will also help us to leave behind personal attacks and work with us to make the ALAC more responsive to the at-large community. With work, I hope we can minimize such feelings of miscommunication in the future.
Thanks, --Wendy
Danny Younger wrote:
Robert Guerra on the NARALO discussion list has revealed that "Consultations were done with key people active on the NA list as well as those in ICANN. Consultations were done privately on a one-to-one basis."
These consultations with "those in ICANN" resulted in a duly nominated and confirmed candidate being removed from the voting roster.
I find it highly disturbing that elected members of the NARALO feel at liberty to consult with "those in ICANN" without engaging in any consultation with those in the NARALO membership.
Who are "those in ICANN" that were consulted? Are ICANN Board members or ICANN Staff complicit in a process to rig the ALAC elections? Or is Robert referring to others? It is his wish that those consultations remain privileged.
We deserve a full investigation into this matter. I remain of the view that a legitimate candidate was treatly unfairly and that at the very least the Ombudsman should be called in to review this matter.
____________________________________________________________________________ ________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica nn.org
Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/ ------
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: +1.914.374.0613 // office: 617.373.7331 Visiting Professor, Northeastern University School of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ http://www.torproject.org/
____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more! http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658 ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica nn.org Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/ ------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.35/1039 - Release Date: 9/29/2007 21:46 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.35/1039 - Release Date: 9/29/2007 21:46