As the deadline for applications is approaching, I would like to give my contribution to the ongoing debate. First of all, a disclaimer. Some people have asked me whether I was going to submit my candidature. As the first ALAC Liaison to the Board, and later on voting Director, it might seem almost natural. However, my answer is no, and the reason is simple. As a Chair of some Board Committees and Working Groups, I feel I have contributed in the past years to the process of establishing the voting seat on the Board for ALAC. As such, I believe that it would be ethically incorrect to apply for a seat that I have contributed to establish. ALAC has many fine potential candidates who are able to do the job even better than me, and without being perceived to be in a sort of conflict of interest position. On the issue about remuneration of the Directors, I think that Thomas (Narten) has well summarized the lively discussions that the Board had on the subject. Opinions were widely different, and all points raised on the ALAC email thread have been abundantly discussed, but leaving still the situation without a Board consensus. My personal opinion is that an ICANN Director should not be remunerated. Incidentally, the case for the Chair is a different one, as we are talking about a task that is almost a full time job. The problem is that in ICANN there are lots of people doing work as volounteers. I don't think that the contribution of a Director is more important, or more time consuming, that other positions like the Name Council Chair. Why should the former be remunerated and the latter not? And then we could go on. Where to draw the line? I fully respect the opinions of, inter alia, Karl. I understand the issue of fiduciary responsibility, the need for legal advice, and so on. However, I still think that to have people that base their decision to be or not to be a Director on whether they get a sufficient amount of money would be risky to say the least. I believe this being true for "generic" Directors, but even more true for a person that has to represent the interest of the AtLarge community. To represent this community I believe that we need to have somebody that has the enthusiasm of fighting for what he/she thinks to be the good thing, somebody who has the strength to overcome the difficulties, somebody who would never be looked at by some internauts in developing countries like a white collar who makes a living pretending to represent them in the ICANN Board while getting paid for it. ALAC needs indeed a "doer", to continue stealing words from Karl. However, I disagree with the part of the analysis from some contributors (was it John?) who claim that you cannot afford to be on the Board unless you are sponsored by your employer or have other funding. I believe, although I might be wrong, to have been on the Board enough of a "doer". The only contribution I had from my employer was to be granted 10 extra days off per year (and only for 2 of the 6 years I have spent on the Board) to attend meetings. All the rest was my own time. It is doable, if you believe in what you are doing, and if you like this job. It is the willingness to fight for your ideas that gives the strength to stay up at night during a 3h teleconference in a foreign language, not the remuneration. It is the satisfaction for doing something useful for the community that allows you to land after a long flight coming from some ICANN event, go home for a quick shower, and go back to your day job. Of course, it puts some stress on you and on your family life, and severely limits your ability to do other activities. Of course, when your term is over, you are happy to have a break and to get time for the things you have neglected for years. But somebody else will pick up the flag and continue the process, and continue to move things forward. All this might sound very "fairy tale-ish" or old fashioned. Icidentally, maybe I do am idealistic and old fashioned, and the world is going in a different direction. But this is my opinion, and I wanted to express it. To be clear, I am not going to the extreme that, if one day some remuneration is granted to Directors, the ideal ALAC Director should refuse it: I am just saying that I would personally not be in favour of electing a candidate who considers remuneration a condition to accept this task. Have a nice weekend, Roberto
Roberto, Well said my friend, Ray
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 6:21 PM To: 'At-Large Worldwide' Subject: [At-Large] ALAC Director
As the deadline for applications is approaching, I would like to give my contribution to the ongoing debate.
First of all, a disclaimer. Some people have asked me whether I was going to submit my candidature. As the first ALAC Liaison to the Board, and later on voting Director, it might seem almost natural. However, my answer is no, and the reason is simple. As a Chair of some Board Committees and Working Groups, I feel I have contributed in the past years to the process of establishing the voting seat on the Board for ALAC. As such, I believe that it would be ethically incorrect to apply for a seat that I have contributed to establish. ALAC has many fine potential candidates who are able to do the job even better than me, and without being perceived to be in a sort of conflict of interest position.
On the issue about remuneration of the Directors, I think that Thomas (Narten) has well summarized the lively discussions that the Board had on the subject. Opinions were widely different, and all points raised on the ALAC email thread have been abundantly discussed, but leaving still the situation without a Board consensus. My personal opinion is that an ICANN Director should not be remunerated. Incidentally, the case for the Chair is a different one, as we are talking about a task that is almost a full time job. The problem is that in ICANN there are lots of people doing work as volounteers. I don't think that the contribution of a Director is more important, or more time consuming, that other positions like the Name Council Chair. Why should the former be remunerated and the latter not? And then we could go on. Where to draw the line? I fully respect the opinions of, inter alia, Karl. I understand the issue of fiduciary responsibility, the need for legal advice, and so on. However, I still think that to have people that base their decision to be or not to be a Director on whether they get a sufficient amount of money would be risky to say the least. I believe this being true for "generic" Directors, but even more true for a person that has to represent the interest of the AtLarge community. To represent this community I believe that we need to have somebody that has the enthusiasm of fighting for what he/she thinks to be the good thing, somebody who has the strength to overcome the difficulties, somebody who would never be looked at by some internauts in developing countries like a white collar who makes a living pretending to represent them in the ICANN Board while getting paid for it. ALAC needs indeed a "doer", to continue stealing words from Karl. However, I disagree with the part of the analysis from some contributors (was it John?) who claim that you cannot afford to be on the Board unless you are sponsored by your employer or have other funding. I believe, although I might be wrong, to have been on the Board enough of a "doer". The only contribution I had from my employer was to be granted 10 extra days off per year (and only for 2 of the 6 years I have spent on the Board) to attend meetings. All the rest was my own time. It is doable, if you believe in what you are doing, and if you like this job. It is the willingness to fight for your ideas that gives the strength to stay up at night during a 3h teleconference in a foreign language, not the remuneration. It is the satisfaction for doing something useful for the community that allows you to land after a long flight coming from some ICANN event, go home for a quick shower, and go back to your day job. Of course, it puts some stress on you and on your family life, and severely limits your ability to do other activities. Of course, when your term is over, you are happy to have a break and to get time for the things you have neglected for years. But somebody else will pick up the flag and continue the process, and continue to move things forward.
All this might sound very "fairy tale-ish" or old fashioned. Icidentally, maybe I do am idealistic and old fashioned, and the world is going in a different direction. But this is my opinion, and I wanted to express it. To be clear, I am not going to the extreme that, if one day some remuneration is granted to Directors, the ideal ALAC Director should refuse it: I am just saying that I would personally not be in favour of electing a candidate who considers remuneration a condition to accept this task.
Have a nice weekend, Roberto
_______________________________________________ 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
I agree with almost Roberto's positions, and as I already said , I also am not applying for the vote seat either, though I believe Roberto could be an excellent candidate. There are some points raised by Alan Greenberg in this debate that I consider quite important. Let's see what we can get as good candidates. Vanda -----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ray Plzak Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 11:19 AM To: 'At-Large Worldwide' Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC Director Roberto, Well said my friend, Ray
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 6:21 PM To: 'At-Large Worldwide' Subject: [At-Large] ALAC Director
As the deadline for applications is approaching, I would like to give my contribution to the ongoing debate.
First of all, a disclaimer. Some people have asked me whether I was going to submit my candidature. As the first ALAC Liaison to the Board, and later on voting Director, it might seem almost natural. However, my answer is no, and the reason is simple. As a Chair of some Board Committees and Working Groups, I feel I have contributed in the past years to the process of establishing the voting seat on the Board for ALAC. As such, I believe that it would be ethically incorrect to apply for a seat that I have contributed to establish. ALAC has many fine potential candidates who are able to do the job even better than me, and without being perceived to be in a sort of conflict of interest position.
On the issue about remuneration of the Directors, I think that Thomas (Narten) has well summarized the lively discussions that the Board had on the subject. Opinions were widely different, and all points raised on the ALAC email thread have been abundantly discussed, but leaving still the situation without a Board consensus. My personal opinion is that an ICANN Director should not be remunerated. Incidentally, the case for the Chair is a different one, as we are talking about a task that is almost a full time job. The problem is that in ICANN there are lots of people doing work as volounteers. I don't think that the contribution of a Director is more important, or more time consuming, that other positions like the Name Council Chair. Why should the former be remunerated and the latter not? And then we could go on. Where to draw the line? I fully respect the opinions of, inter alia, Karl. I understand the issue of fiduciary responsibility, the need for legal advice, and so on. However, I still think that to have people that base their decision to be or not to be a Director on whether they get a sufficient amount of money would be risky to say the least. I believe this being true for "generic" Directors, but even more true for a person that has to represent the interest of the AtLarge community. To represent this community I believe that we need to have somebody that has the enthusiasm of fighting for what he/she thinks to be the good thing, somebody who has the strength to overcome the difficulties, somebody who would never be looked at by some internauts in developing countries like a white collar who makes a living pretending to represent them in the ICANN Board while getting paid for it. ALAC needs indeed a "doer", to continue stealing words from Karl. However, I disagree with the part of the analysis from some contributors (was it John?) who claim that you cannot afford to be on the Board unless you are sponsored by your employer or have other funding. I believe, although I might be wrong, to have been on the Board enough of a "doer". The only contribution I had from my employer was to be granted 10 extra days off per year (and only for 2 of the 6 years I have spent on the Board) to attend meetings. All the rest was my own time. It is doable, if you believe in what you are doing, and if you like this job. It is the willingness to fight for your ideas that gives the strength to stay up at night during a 3h teleconference in a foreign language, not the remuneration. It is the satisfaction for doing something useful for the community that allows you to land after a long flight coming from some ICANN event, go home for a quick shower, and go back to your day job. Of course, it puts some stress on you and on your family life, and severely limits your ability to do other activities. Of course, when your term is over, you are happy to have a break and to get time for the things you have neglected for years. But somebody else will pick up the flag and continue the process, and continue to move things forward.
All this might sound very "fairy tale-ish" or old fashioned. Icidentally, maybe I do am idealistic and old fashioned, and the world is going in a different direction. But this is my opinion, and I wanted to express it. To be clear, I am not going to the extreme that, if one day some remuneration is granted to Directors, the ideal ALAC Director should refuse it: I am just saying that I would personally not be in favour of electing a candidate who considers remuneration a condition to accept this task.
Have a nice weekend, Roberto
_______________________________________________ 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
On 09/03/2010 03:20 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote: A couple of quick comments. 1. You have been a good board member; if you chose to submit your name you would hear cheers from many quarters, including this one. 2. A small but significant point regarding the subject line. The board seat is not that of an "ALAC Director" but rather one for the "at large", a term that is larger than the system of the ALAC and its hierarchy of RALOs and ALSs. 3. You and I know better than most that doing the job of an ICANN director is very hard. It is not just the ICANN side but also the task of being in communication with the community of internet users, engaging with them, debating, agreeing, disagreeing, and most importantly, accepting when persuasive arguments require us to change our point of view. 4. With regard to director remuneration. I make a distinction between payments just for being a board member and having a fund available to cover certain well defined expenses that a director may incur (with the money flowing directly from ICANN without actually passing through the hands of the director.) My sense is that the latter would give rise to fewer difficulties. 5. The stress of the role is enormous. If one is married it is rather important to have spousal agreement as the role puts a lot of stress onto a relationship. --karl--
I agree with points 1,2,3 and 5. I will not comment on point for as it is a matter currently under examination by the board. Ray
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Karl Auerbach Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 6:09 PM To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC Director
On 09/03/2010 03:20 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
A couple of quick comments.
1. You have been a good board member; if you chose to submit your name you would hear cheers from many quarters, including this one.
2. A small but significant point regarding the subject line. The board seat is not that of an "ALAC Director" but rather one for the "at large", a term that is larger than the system of the ALAC and its hierarchy of RALOs and ALSs.
3. You and I know better than most that doing the job of an ICANN director is very hard. It is not just the ICANN side but also the task of being in communication with the community of internet users, engaging with them, debating, agreeing, disagreeing, and most importantly, accepting when persuasive arguments require us to change our point of view.
4. With regard to director remuneration. I make a distinction between payments just for being a board member and having a fund available to cover certain well defined expenses that a director may incur (with the money flowing directly from ICANN without actually passing through the hands of the director.) My sense is that the latter would give rise to fewer difficulties.
5. The stress of the role is enormous. If one is married it is rather important to have spousal agreement as the role puts a lot of stress onto a relationship.
--karl-- _______________________________________________ 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
participants (4)
-
Karl Auerbach -
Ray Plzak -
Roberto Gaetano -
Vanda UOL