Alan Greenberg ha scritto:
Four candidates at my last count Sebastien, Vittorio, Wendy and Wolfgang (clearly heavily weighted towards the end of the alphabet).
(If I'm correct, Wendy and Wolfgang haven't sent an acceptance of the nomination yet, but I guess they will.)
I would very much like to see written statements from the candidates BEFORE arriving in San Juan - to be backed up by discussions (both private and within the Committee/community) at San Juan.
Sure, let me start (we don't have so much time!). Before entering into the discussion as a candidate, I really want to say that I am concerned by the possibility of the Committee spending significant amounts of time and energy in San Juan in yet another round of elections, after having done the same in Sao Paulo six months ago, and with the perspective of doing it again in Los Angeles in four months for what regards the other officer positions. I really don't see the need or the advantage of that for the community - our travel is not being paid to play with small scale politics, but to address the real problems of registrants - so I hope that we can keep the entire process as reasonable, compact and quick as possible, and then focus our attention on the actual policy issues. I still think that I am particularly fit for this role; I have been in the ALAC since it was formed over four years ago, but I was also involved in broader activities such as the WSIS/IGF; I have a global perspective both in geographical and in professional terms, and I think that I can represent fairly all the different countries and cultures that form our constituency. I put a lot of time and effort in serving in this position, trying to represent the community rather than myself, and I think that the amount of communication from the Board to the ALAC / the At Large community and back has been significant, with positive results already starting to appear after a few months. I even decided to leave the European ALAC seat to devote more resources to this job, and also to encourage new members to join. Also, a non-voting liaisoning role has a clear requirement for stability: you are joining a group where you can only act by becoming influential in discussions, and personal relationships and positive attitudes are required to be effective. The GAC changed its liaison only after four years, and the SSAC never changed, with Crocker now serving for the fifth year in a row. I think that changing our mind on the Board liaison after six months, after having changed Chair three months ago, after a round of heated elections three months before, would really send a bad signal. I would rather find it better to have a frank discussion on anything that people think should be changed in how I perform the role. So, all in all, I think that it is in the best interest of the At Large for me to continue. Thus, for me it would be interesting to hear from the other candidates why they decided to seek the nomination: what is going wrong with my current service in this position, what makes them think that there is the need to change, and in what regards they would fulfill the role better than I do. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------