Danny: The candidate you proposed was indeed considered, but did not make the short list. that was not a personal decision of mine, but of the NA ALAC representatives. Informal consultations - due diligence you could call it - took place to assess the candidates being proposed, and if they would be well suited and able to strategically represent users from not only Canada and the USA, but users "everywhere" on the nomcom. Your statement that no consultation was done with those on NA RALO, is in fact wrong. Consultations were done with key people active on the NA list as well as those in ICANN. Consultations were done done privately on a one -to-one basis. I will keep the sources confidential, - they can speak out if they wish - but suffice it to say that your candidate, well - got very mixed reviews, in fact some quite negative. Those who got far more favorable reviews - ended up on the short list. As i've mentioned now several times, my person view is that the NA Nomcom candidate that - was elected by a large majority of ALAC members - will be able to well and strategically represent the views from the ALAC on the nomcom. The person in is well known to civil society working in ICANN as a person we can work with, and who has integrity. We will be well served. He has another "hat" - as do many of us as well. So i don't see that as an issue in the least. Indeed this whole discussion reminds me on an ongoing discussion in Canada related to elections canada's stance on allowing veiled women to vote . http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/09/10/elections-veils.html It's not for the administrator to settle the current societal debate. If I were to do so, I would assume the role that does not belong to me, and above all, usurp the role of Canada's elected politicians." Currently, I do not believe criteria exists as to who can or can not be a candidate for ALAC to select as its nomcom representatives. If you want that changed - please, by all means do suggest that ALS's and ALAC change the rules. In summary - Hey, i didn't support your candidate. I have that right. Due process was followed, and a good, honest and very strategic candidate from Canada was duly elected. Please, respect the decision . If you feel the process could have been better - please, be constructive and suggest changes so that we can improve things going forward. In the meantime, decision has taken place.. let's move forward.. Let's work with Ross, and take up his offer to speak with him on a teleconference. He's keen to hear from the NA RALO, and in fact ALAC as a whole on how he can best represent us. As he shouldn't hold him to a higher standard - let's also arrange consultations with the other ALAC nomcom reps . After all if they are supposed to be our representatives, let's make sure they stay in touch and consult with us. regards Robert On 29-Sep-07, at 2:16 PM, Danny Younger wrote:

Robert,

Bottom line: You removed a duly nominated candidate that was duly confirmed from the voting roster, a candidate with seven years experience within ICANN defending the public interest, a candidate that properly submitted his credentials for consideration, and the only confirmed candidate that hailed from the United States... all without any consultation with members of the NARALO discuss list, and without member consent for such action.

You also introduced a candidate from the supplier community surreptitiously without any consultation with the membership. In my view, your actions demonstrate that you are not fit for holding office.

regards, Danny

--- Robert Guerra <lists@PRIVATERRA.INFO> wrote:

...

I've been away for the last few days and am only now catching up on this list's email...

It seems some questions have been raised as to the process by which the NA ALAC , and in fact ALAC as a whole selected the nomcom candidate from the NA region.

First,let me describe the process -

The NA ALAC reps held two teleconferences where we discussed the Nomcom candidates. Beau, Alan and I spent considerable time discussing the i\, the candidates and additional persons we might want to consider

The candidate pool came from names proposed on the NA list, as well as persons suggested by the NA Regional reps. The breakdown was thus - one person proposed from the NA list, and 5 persons suggested from the ALAC reps. Of the 6 persons, one candidate was removed as they had been elected board liason. the rest were contacted to confirm that indeed they would be willing and able to serve the term. Three confirmed there were interested, willing and able to represent ALAC on nomcom. two top candidates were identified and a discussion took place to see if a consensus candidate could be chosen. This was not the case, as such the two were submitted to the ALAC for them to vote on.

Key facts:

- the two proposed candidates both were supported by more then one ALAC rep - The consensus view that developed was that a candidate should be well familiar with icann and/or able to learn about it's politics and issues, and ability to represent the user voice/view were key factors needed in a candidate.

My personal choice was Ross, as i'm quite familiar with his work with the user community in Canada and his involvement in CIRA. It is his proven track record to be able to represent users on the CIRA board as well as his support for NCUC and ALAC view that led to me voting for him. In summary, I voted based on a track record in engaging users and the user community (in canada) as well as a very good understand of ICANN, it's politics and nomcom.

Using the recently approved voting rules adopted by the ALAC, candidates proposed from the regions where a consensus was not possible were considered by the ALAC. A one week open voting & period was opened - where opinions were expressed by ALAC members on candidates, and voting took place.Voting closed a particular day, after which the results were announced.

The existing icann bylaws state that ALAC should appoint candidates - and that was done. Though not specifically mentioned , consulation also tool place - and considerable time, and effort was taken to review candidates and elect one that fit the criteria developed.

Ross, in my opinion - despite what some critics might say - has the knowledge and ability, integrity and ability to represent ALAC and users interests well on the nomcom. I believe that he will serve alac well .

Secondly, let me say that constant critiquing ALAC reps is not constructive at all. Personally, I have tried to bring values of consultation and dialogue between those in the NA ALS, ALAC members and other key constituencies such as NCUC, SSAC and many others . I see there is great value in collaboration - one that can serve to bring a stronger voice to users and civil society inside the complex and very political structure that is ICANN.

In summary - Key appointments and nominations need to be strategic and constructive. I believe that the two candidates proposed were good, and that the better qualified and most knowledgeable person who indeed will be able to serve all users from the NA region has been selected. Can we do things better in the future - indeed we can. let's learn from this experience and build a better process for the 08/09 nomcom selection process

regards

Robert

______________________________________________________________________ ______________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/