----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 12:45
PM
Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Vote for
ICANN Board seat # 14
As all
interested candidates and their supporters are (or should be) aware of
the timelines and procedure, I don't believe the nomination process
should be reopened except for exceptional
circumstances. Deciding at the last moment to solicit support to run is
not, in my opinion, an "exceptional" circumstance.
Regards,
Lucy
Nichols
Bruce, Alick and Fellow Councillors,
I am one of several GNSO Councillors who was
contacted by Tim Ruiz ( of GoDaddy) last Friday - in my case, just an
hour before the nomination period closed. Tim asked if I
would nominate him for Board Seat #14. Because his telephone call to
me occurred so close to the close of nominations, and I was travelling at the
time, there was not time to determine whether or not a second nomination would
be a good idea, or even time to consider whether Tim would be a suitable
candidate. I advised him I would not be able to nominate him on such short
notice.
In the meantime, there has been some further
correspondence. I have been contacted again by Tim, and he has contacted Bruce
as to the process for extending nominations. Bruce has advised me
that;
"In terms of
process, the nomination period is closed, but the Council
could decide by
vote to re-open the nomination period if there were
suitable
candidates. A member of Council would need to propose a
motion, and
preferably have obtained some support from other councillors
prior to the
meeting."
I wish to emphasize that it is not my
purpose or intention in sending you this email to set up a
challenge to Michael Palage's candidacy. I am, rather, responding in my
capacity as a GNSO Councillor to a request from a member of the Registrar
constituency, and attempting to determine whether there is interest amongst
the Council members to entertain the possibility of considering another
candidate. If there is, perhaps we could have this discussion during today's
teleconference, and decide whether or not we want to take the necessary steps
to re-open the nomination period.
Best regards,
Maureen
Maureen Cubberley
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 9:49
PM
Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Vote for
ICANN Board seat # 14
Hello Alick,
>
> In most other
organisations, when there is only a single
> candidate, when
nominations close the single candidate is
> declared elected
unopposed and there is no vote.
That is not the case for the ICANN
Board elections.
From the bylaws, Article X, section 3, paragraph
6:
http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#X
"The
GNSO Council shall make selections to fill Seats 13 and 14 on the
ICANN
Board by written ballot or by action at a meeting; any such
selection
must have affirmative votes comprising a majority of the votes
of all the
members of the GNSO Council. Notification of the GNSO
Council's
selections shall be given by the GNSO Chair in writing to the
ICANN
Secretary, consistent with Article VI, Sections 8(4) and 12(1)."
The
appointment is for three years.
Council members should
ensure that the candidate meets the selection
criteria for a director,
and has support from the GNSO community.
In terms of process, we can
either use an email vote (to be ratified by
a subsequent Council meeting)
or we simply hold a vote during a Council
meeting. While we
could hold a vote in the meeting on 17 March, some
Council members may
feel they need time to interview the candidate and
discuss the candidate
with members of the GNSO community prior to making
a
decision.
> What happens if the sole candidate does not get a
majority of
> the votes?
There are two options:
(1) we
re-open the nomination period, and make an effort to seek
candidates for
the Board.
(2) the sole candidate addresses any concerns that some
Council members
may have had, and the vote is re-held.
The
situation is really no different to that if you have only one
current
candidate for a job. If that candidate does not pass a
job
interview, reference check etc, an organisation would seek
more
candidates.
Regards,
Bruce
Tonkin