Four candidates at my last count Sebastien, Vittorio, Wendy and Wolfgang (clearly heavily weighted towards the end of the alphabet). 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. With all due respect to my colleague Robert, I would prefer NOT having campaigning statements by others on behalf of the candidates (but that my be just *my* preference). And I support Robert's statement about the ability to properly devote the time to this task. I know the commitment, both in travel and daily, that being GNSO Liaison requires, and the Board Liaison commitment is surely much larger. Alan At 18/06/2007 09:03 AM, Robert Guerra wrote:

Four quick comments:

1. Seems all the nominees so far have been from developed countries. are there any interested, and qualified candidates that come from elsewhere?

2. If memory serves me right, we now have 3 candidates who have been mentioned, nominated and/or proposed in some way. That makes for a contested nomination. Thus the question - what is the process by which either one or any new candidates get ultimately selected for the position. That is to say, what is the process.

As with any election, i think it important to get to know the "candidate" and be able to make a recommendation and/or opinion based on their experience and proposed objectives and agenda as board liason.

I ask, as a far number of ALS from both North America and I think LAC will also be at the meeting. With all the talk of transparency and openness at at-large , well, would be good to indeed practice what we preach. Might I suggest,that the proposed candidates try to spend some time to meet the constituency that will be at the meeting.

3. Serving on the board is no small task and quite a big commitment. I know several board members and they say that ICANN takes up anywhere from 25% to well over 60% of their time. This is quite significant and no small matter for anyone from at-large who may be involved.

4. As I indeed did nominate Vittorio - my support remains with him..

Vittorio has by his involvement in at-large in the past, as the current board liason, as well as his long involvement at the recent UN world summit on the information society (WSIS) has demonstrated that he knows well how to consult with users, knows how to bring their many varied and at times conflicting views forward in a constructive and effective matter.

If he does indeed have the time to serve - well, that he'll have to tell us.

regards,

Robert --- Robert Guerra <<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.ca>rguerra@privaterra.ca> Managing Director, Privaterra Tel +1 416 893 0377

On 18-Jun-07, at 7:27 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:

...

I nominate Wolfgang Kleinwächter as a candidate for Board Liaison. Prof Kleinwächter has been active in Internet Governance for many years. He was a member of the WSIS Working Group on Internet Governance, has been instrumental in creating the Global Internet Governance Academic Network” (GIGANET) and has been involved in ICANN processes for many years (see attached document) He is a member of the EURALO.

As Board Liaison, he will: * raise a voice clearly in support for the interests of individual Internet users in open and closed board meetings and * keep a close and regular contact to the members of the ALAC, consult with them on all relevant issues and report back from official and unofficial Board meetings.

No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.0/852 - Release Date: 6/17/2007 8:23 AM <2007 06 Board Liaison wolfgang.doc> _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: <http://www.alac.icann.org>http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: <http://www.icannalac.org>http://www.icannalac.org

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

Hi Hong When we discussed this, the decision was that the Liaison will be voted for by the ALAC online immediately after the San Juan meeting… . Jacqueline From: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 10:01 AM To: Alan Greenberg Cc: At-large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Board liaison - What's the process to be selected ..? I checked the agenda on the socialtext but did not find an item on Board liaison selection? Will it be discussed/decided at ALAC public meeting on June 28? Hong On 6/18/07, Alan Greenberg <HYPERLINK "mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca"alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: Four candidates at my last count Sebastien, Vittorio, Wendy and Wolfgang (clearly heavily weighted towards the end of the alphabet). 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. With all due respect to my colleague Robert, I would prefer NOT having campaigning statements by others on behalf of the candidates (but that my be just *my* preference). And I support Robert's statement about the ability to properly devote the time to this task. I know the commitment, both in travel and daily, that being GNSO Liaison requires, and the Board Liaison commitment is surely much larger. Alan At 18/06/2007 09:03 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: Four quick comments: 1. Seems all the nominees so far have been from developed countries. are there any interested, and qualified candidates that come from elsewhere? 2. If memory serves me right, we now have 3 candidates who have been mentioned, nominated and/or proposed in some way. That makes for a contested nomination. Thus the question - what is the process by which either one or any new candidates get ultimately selected for the position. That is to say, what is the process. As with any election, i think it important to get to know the "candidate" and be able to make a recommendation and/or opinion based on their experience and proposed objectives and agenda as board liason. I ask, as a far number of ALS from both North America and I think LAC will also be at the meeting. With all the talk of transparency and openness at at-large , well, would be good to indeed practice what we preach. Might I suggest,that the proposed candidates try to spend some time to meet the constituency that will be at the meeting. 3. Serving on the board is no small task and quite a big commitment. I know several board members and they say that ICANN takes up anywhere from 25% to well over 60% of their time. This is quite significant and no small matter for anyone from at-large who may be involved. 4. As I indeed did nominate Vittorio - my support remains with him.. Vittorio has by his involvement in at-large in the past, as the current board liason, as well as his long involvement at the recent UN world summit on the information society (WSIS) has demonstrated that he knows well how to consult with users, knows how to bring their many varied and at times conflicting views forward in a constructive and effective matter. If he does indeed have the time to serve - well, that he'll have to tell us. regards, Robert --- Robert Guerra <HYPERLINK "mailto:rguerra@privaterra.ca" \n rguerra@privaterra.ca > Managing Director, Privaterra Tel +1 416 893 0377 On 18-Jun-07, at 7:27 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: I nominate Wolfgang Kleinwächter as a candidate for Board Liaison. Prof Kleinwächter has been active in Internet Governance for many years. He was a member of the WSIS Working Group on Internet Governance, has been instrumental in creating the Global Internet Governance Academic Network" (GIGANET) and has been involved in ICANN processes for many years (see attached document) He is a member of the EURALO. As Board Liaison, he will: * raise a voice clearly in support for the interests of individual Internet users in open and closed board meetings and * keep a close and regular contact to the members of the ALAC, consult with them on all relevant issues and report back from official and unofficial Board meetings. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.0/852 - Release Date: 6/17/2007 8:23 AM <2007 06 Board Liaison wolfgang.doc> _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list HYPERLINK "mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" \nALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org HYPERLINK "http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g" \nhttp://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.o rg At-Large Official Site: HYPERLINK "http://www.alac.icann.org/" \nhttp://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: HYPERLINK "http://www.icannalac.org/" \nhttp://www.icannalac.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list HYPERLINK "mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" \nALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org HYPERLINK "http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g" \nhttp://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.o rg At-Large Official Site: HYPERLINK "http://www.alac.icann.org/" \nhttp://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: HYPERLINK "http://www.icannalac.org/" \nhttp://www.icannalac.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list HYPERLINK "mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org"ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org HYPERLINK "http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g" \nhttp://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.o rg At-Large Official Site: HYPERLINK "http://www.alac.icann.org/" \nhttp://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: HYPERLINK "http://www.icannalac.org/" \nhttp://www.icannalac.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.0/852 - Release Date: 6/17/2007 8:23 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.0/852 - Release Date: 6/17/2007 8:23 AM

I agree on all points. I still have a preference for no third-party campaigning, but perhaps that is just me. Given the high-contested election, I do have a preference for a secret ballot to minimize bad feelings, and to ensure that people vote for who they believe is the best candidate instead of who they may feel they have to visibly support. Alan At 18/06/2007 10:34 AM, Robert Guerra wrote:

Alan:

Thanks for the comments on the process and request of information from the candidates.

My concern is that the process, in as much as possible - be as open and transparent as possible. Comments should, i think not only come from the candidates - but from all those involved in at-large.

Key positions, should - wherever possible be subject to comment, consultation, and an open and transparent process. Not sure if nominations/decisions have been done that way in the past. If they haven't, then we should change them. we have the occasion now , so let's try..

I still have a preference for no third-party

campaigning, but perhaps that is just me.

Not just for you Alan, I concur and prefer that there are no third party campaigns. And also support the secret ballot. Having said that though, it would be ideal if the committee could avoid spending so much time and energy in San Juan in yet another round of elections so soon after changing chair and again in six months vote for another new board liaison. I believe there is need for a certain degree of stability at least for the next year or so. alice . Given the high-contested election, I do have a preference for a secret ballot to minimize bad feelings, and to ensure that people

vote for who they believe is the best candidate instead of who they may feel they have to visibly support.

Alan

At 18/06/2007 10:34 AM, Robert Guerra wrote:

...

Alan:

Thanks for the comments on the process and request of information

from the candidates.

...

My concern is that the process, in as much as possible - be as open and transparent as possible. Comments should, i think not only come

from the candidates - but from all those involved in at-large.

...

Key positions, should - wherever possible be subject to comment, consultation, and an open and transparent process. Not sure if nominations/decisions have been done that way in the past. If they haven't, then we should change them. we have the occasion now , so let's try..

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

Given the high-contested election, I do have a preference for a secret ballot to minimize bad feelings, and to ensure that people vote for who they believe is the best candidate instead of who they may feel they have to visibly support.

Just to make sure that everybody has the same understanding, the result might differ if every member can only vote for one person, or whether there will be a multiple vote with ranking. Also, even in the case of one vote, how are the results to be dealt with? The one who gets more votes? Or are there going to be rounds, with elimination of the candidate with less votes? Having just witnessed the problems in running an EURALO election where the rules where changed during the vote, may I strongly recommend to set the rules in advance, even if it might take some additional time. After all, the new Liaison only takes office at the end of October. Cheers, Roberto

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/ <--------