Dear All, I agree with the views that Rinalia made.Carlos and Gareth raise important points. These are my personal views on the issues that Evan raised, namely: (1) ICANN's Internal Complexity; (2) Danger of not completing unfinished business "Rotation for the sake of rotation" is a way of pigeon holing the issues. I will clarify what I meant when I suggested rotation. Evan you raise some very good views and it is good to generate dialogue. *Why Rotation is Healthy?* *Expanded Sight* * * Rotation is healthy and helps to offer fresh and dynamic perspectives. Each ALAC member brings to the ALAC a unique set of socializations, skill sets and understanding where together, the panoramic view formed and forged creates powerful synergy as far as carrying out ALAC's core objectives. *Systems and Structures are already in place* * * The ALAC is a Team of volunteers both elected and appointed. Each ALAC member is expected when called upon to be able to carry out duties from time to time. Article XI of the Bylaws Section 2 Subsection 4 spells out the duties of the ALAC. For the 10 years that ALAC has been in place, it now has systems and structures that enable the carriage of each of these functions. The At Large Staff also provides support in this regard. *ALAC has an important role in ICANN's Accountability Mechanisms* * * The volume of work achieved by the ALAC to date is the combination of excellent leadership and work of all ALAC and At Large Worldwide and is an example of collaboration. It goes without saying that the core functions of the ALAC have systems in place to enable and facilitate Input from all of ALAC and At Large from time to time. The Bylaws recognise that the ALAC have an important role in ICANN's Accountability mechanisms etc. *Sustainability of Operations* * * The reality of any business or organisation is that there will always be an ongoing need to address "sustainability", this is why there are systems that are designed to ensure that the risks are managed. The rationale behind documenting of meetings through recording of calls, keeping minutes of meetings, keeping records of resolutions etc is to ensure that there is "Accountability" and "Transparency" and also to enable others to pick up where they left off. There is legitimacy in the "Continuity Arguments" hence the nominations retaining the Chair and one more. For continuity, having two is more than enough to sustain and conclude the "projects, business that you suggest". *Create Opportunities for Others Growth * The idea of having rotation is not borne out of "vendetta" or "ambition". As mentioned before, I have no interest in joining the Executive Committee. It is simply borne out of the desire to see others within ALAC grow and be given a chance to hold these positions of leadership. There are many people within the ALAC and those who have won elections that are more than capable of holding positions on the ExCom. The strength of the ALAC is the entire ALAC as a Team. *Opportunities for Providing Guidance* The premise that if ALAC is a Team, then there can be a period where "guidance", "coaching", "mentoring" can be provided by those who have formerly sat in those positions on certain matters. On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Gareth Shearman <shearman@victoria.tc.ca>wrote:
+1
Gareth
On 2012-09-18, at 9:38 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
On 18 September 2012 09:57, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq@gmail.com> wrote:
+1 this is a very reasonable position. We have to have rotation and new faces all the time in all positions.
As someone standing for re-election, I have an obvious bias in the discussion. However, even were I not, I would be intrigued -- and a little unsettled -- by the concept of "change for the sake of change".
There are term limits for many positions within At-Large leadership -- I am in my last of two terms as ALAC member -- and I am curious to know the rationale behind "new faces all the time" in a manner that exceeds both the intent and the practice of these reasonable limits.
This is now my sixth year within ICANN as a volunteer and I am only now finding a comfort level with the many layers and complexities of working within ICANN's policy development. That may just mean that I'm slow, but I would suggest that ICANN possesses a level of internal complexity rivalling that of a UN or government bureacuracy. It takes time just to learn.
Insisting on rapid rotation -- for the sake of rapid rotation -- ensures that ALAC leadership will never have the depth necessary to deal with issues that matter to Internet end-users. Our adversaries -- those who dispense with the public interest because of financial gain -- have no such limits. Indeed there are many within the domain industry who have been involved with ICANN since its inception and are acutely aware of its inner workings and how to manipulate them for gain. Given our reasonable levels of term limits our people will never achieve the level of personal entrenchment enjoyed by industry, but I would suggest that the rapid rotation suggested by some here would be absolutely devastating to the ability of ICANN At-Large to assert itself in the corridors of power.
If there are issues with the performance of individuals running for re-election, general complaints about leadership or direction, or the ascendency of people advocating fresh priorities or changes of strategy, by all means let's bring them forward and engage in useful debate and an informed election. I welcome such engagement. But I know that there are a number of issues that I personally am involved with and consider "unfinished business" -- unfinished because they just take so long to process through ICANN. The others running for re-election have their own priorities in this regard. I think it would be a shame -- and damaging to the At-Large cause -- if many of these efforts are forced to pause while being rebooted or re-learned simply because of an election based on theory that looks good on paper but works poorly in the negotiations room.
Two years from now, because of term limits, I know for certain that I will be off not only the executive but my ALAC position. I will welcome my replacement. I fully understand and appreciate the need to share the load and encourage new voices, both as a matter of outreach and keeping At-Large constantly in touch. But I suggest that there is a balance to be struck between continuity and refreshment, and that the balance currently in place within ALAC is a good one. Going more narrowly than term limits to assert change for its own sake does a disservice to incumbents and all of At-Large.
In most organizations of which I'm aware -- whether corporation, government or NPO -- frequent changes of leadership does not indicate stability or success.
- Evan _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851