Strictly from a personal point of view:

I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons, but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors.
If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be communicated to the SG.
If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding whether to hold a secret or open ballot.

I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction. In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and not my personal views.

Chuck

From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate

Hi

On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?

I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a secret ballot in this case.

Cheers

Mary

Mary W S Wong

Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs

Franklin Pierce Law Center

Two White Street

Concord, NH 03301

USA

Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu

Phone: 1-603-513-5143

Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php

Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584