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 -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Maureen Cubberley Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:09 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14 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 ----- From: Bruce Tonkin <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG 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
I guess all council members are happy with Michael Palage... That is not a bad thing in itself, I think. Marc On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, at 19:45 [=GMT+0200], Lucy.Nichols@nokia.com wrote:
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
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Maureen Cubberley Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:09 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14
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 ----- From: Bruce Tonkin <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG 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
Fellow councillors, perhaps if the sole candidate were to obtain less than 50% of the votes in the first ballot the nominations should be re-opened? Alick -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Marc Schneiders Sent: Friday, 18 March 2005 7:49 a.m. To: Lucy.Nichols@nokia.com Cc: maureen@asmconsultants.ca; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au; council@gnso.icann.org; gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14 I guess all council members are happy with Michael Palage... That is not a bad thing in itself, I think. Marc On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, at 19:45 [=GMT+0200], Lucy.Nichols@nokia.com wrote:
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
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Maureen Cubberley Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:09 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14
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 ----- From: Bruce Tonkin <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG 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
Thanks for your reply Lucy. Good point. Regards, Maureen ----- Original Message ----- From: Lucy.Nichols@nokia.com To: maureen@asmconsultants.ca ; Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au ; council@gnso.icann.org Cc: gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org 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 -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Maureen Cubberley Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:09 AM To: Bruce Tonkin; council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14 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 ----- From: Bruce Tonkin To: council@gnso.icann.org Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG 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
participants (4)
-
Alick Wilson -
Lucy.Nichols＠nokia.com -
Marc Schneiders -
Maureen Cubberley