- EURO-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Further Update to the Elections Page
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

Dear All: In order to accomodate all proposals with respect to the number of board seats, I have modified the page above. I hope that we can now move on to other conversations, since what is reflected below allows the voters to decide between all of the proposals received related to the board and the size of the board. --- 2007 EURALO Election Details As posted by email by the ICANN staff, incorporating the decisions recommended to the region on the teleconference of 4 May 2007. ELECTION PERIOD: Five Calendar Days, beginning at Noon UTC on the date when the ballot has completed testing, and ending on at Noon UTC on the 5th day. VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the beginning of the voting - Text available from the RALO Organising Instruments page. Current list of MOU signatories can be found at: the MoU Signatories page. CANDIDATES: All those nominated up to the end of the teleconference on 4th May 2007 (see below for complete list) NUMBER OF BOARD SEATS: The strong recommendation of those on the teleconference was that there should be 7 members of the initial board. Since there were objections to this number, then the call's strong recommendation is that there should be a section on the ballot for each voter to pick from amongst the following options for the number of total seats: 5, 7, 9. A subsequent proposal was received to adopt the entire slate of candidates. PROPOSED COMPROMISE: The selection on the ballot would allow each voter to select from the following options: 5,7,9, All eligible candidates Voting For the ALAC Candidates: The ballot will work as follows: Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the ALAC candidates. The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the preferences expressed. The candidate receiving the highest preference across all preference votes cast will show at the top of the list; the next-highest directly underneath, and the third preference at the bottom. Since the GC office has ruled that the candidature of Ms. Cretu is in order, there will be three candidates. The terms of the two seats are staggered. Whichever candidate receives the highest preference from amongst all the ranked votes cast shall have the two-year term. The candidate receiving the next- highest ranking shall receive the one year term. The two candidates receiving the highest aggregated preference votes shall be elected. The remaining candidate, (if any) will be subject to election to the Board (see below for details) Voting For the EURALO Board: The ballot for the board will list all of the current nominees for board seats, of which there are eleven (11) (reproduced below and also at Meeting Notes 4 May 2007. This list includes two of the three candidates for ALAC seats,as one candidate has withdrawn his name from consideration for a Board seat. The candidate for an ALAC seat who does not get elected, may be seated as a board member (but see below). No candidate for ALAC may be elected to both an ALAC seat AND a board seat, however. The actual ballot will work as follows: Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the board nominees. The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the preferences expressed. The board members who will be elected are the top 'N' listed, from the top of the list on down. The Number 'N' shall be either: that number from the selection above (5,7,9) which receives the most votes., or If the number of candidates from the selection above entitled 'All Candidates' receives a majorit of the votes, then all candidates shall be seated. TERM OF BOARD MEMBERS: It was not decided on the call how to determine which board members would receive one year terms, and which would receive two, as per the Bylaws, Clause 9.5.2. Therefore, the staff recommends the following: The top 1/2 of the list of preferences from the board election (rounded to the nearest whole number, depending upon the number of seats), will receive two-year terms, and the bottom 1/2 will receive one-year terms. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO OBJECT TO THIS PROCEDURE as this is simply a staff proposal. Keep in mind, however, that it might be viewed as less than ideal to have another ballot, immediately after the first, to decide who shall have what length of term from amongst those elected. VOTING MECHANISM: At-Large uses a voting system provided by BigPulse (www.bigpulse.com) The authorised voter will receive an individualised email, with a clickable link as well as manual login instructions, which are individually-generated. The system will be setup to provide a secret ballot, and the ICANN staff will ensure that the system produces a reminder email 48 hours before the vote closes, and then again 24 hours before the vote closes, to any voter who has not yet voted to help ensure that they do cast a vote. We will also setup a URL where anyone will be able to see the results of the vote for themselves to ensure transparency with respect to the results. This URL will be forwarded to both European email lists. CANDIDATES LIST Christian Name Surname ALS (Country of ALS) Country of Residence Nationality Nominating ALS Board Candidate (Y/N) ALAC Candidate (2 seats) Notes Patrick Vande Walle ISOC Luxembourg (Luxembourg) Luxembourg Belgium ISOC Luxembourg (Self) SN: 07/04/07 Sébastien Bachollet ISOC France (France) France France ISOC Bulgaria (D Pefeva) Nom: Dessi Veronica Cretu netzwerk neue medien (Germany) Moldava Moldova Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Nom: Wolfgang Rudi Vansnick ISOC Belgium (Belgium) Belgium Belgium ISOC Belgium (Self) Yes Vittorio Bertola ISOC Italy (Italy) Italy Italy ISOC Italy (Self) Yes Christoph Bruch GCLU (Germany) Germany Germany ISOC Italy (V Bertola), Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Desiree Miloshevic United Kingdom Serbia Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Bill Drake Switzerland USA Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Jeanette Hofmann Germany Germany Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Karen Banks UK Australia netzwerk neue medien (A Muehlberg) Yes Wolf Ludwig Switzerland Germany netzwerk neue medien (A Muehlberg) Yes member of Communica.ch, an ALS candidate organisation Paco de Quito ISOC CAT (Spain) Spain Spain ISOC Bulgaria (D Pefeva) Yes Sebastien Bachollet ISOC France (France) France France N/A (ALAC Candidate) Yes (ALAC Candidate) Veronica Cretu netzwerk neue medien (Germany) Moldova Moldova N/A (ALAC Candidate) Yes (ALAC Candidate) For the two ALAC seats Patrick Vande Walle Sebastien Bachollet Veronica Cretu For the EURALO Board Rudi Vansnick Vittorio Bertola Christoph Bruch Desiree Miloshevic Bill Drake Jeanette Hofmann Karen Banks Wolf Ludwig Paco de Qinto Patrick Vande Walle Sebastien Bachollet Veronica Cretu Created by Nick Ashton-Hart on May 5 7:38am. Updated by Nick Ashton- Hart on May 11 7:33am. edit - comment -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] No voting on board seats
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

See below On 11/05/07, Annette Muehlberg <Annette.Muehlberg(a)web.de> wrote: > All, > the link has not been updated: > It has now - you have to understand that I do keep these things up but if there are a few hours' delay in doing so I would hope to have a bit of forbearance... > Strong objections have been raised to the proposal of having only 7 board seats. > This has been reflected. > The alternative proposal was to just take all nominees and let them form the board (10 in case Sebastian and Veronica are going to be ALAC members, 9 in case Patrick and Veronika are going to be ALAC members and 9 in case Sebastian and Patrick are going to be ALAC members) plus the non-voting ALAC members. This is an alternative proposal. What I would suggest is that an additional ballot item be added. The decision would then be based upon the following selections: 5,7,9, all candidates > > We just state that for this period, depending on the outcome of the ALAC selection the board will either have 9 or 10 voting members. > That is a proposal of some ALSes but it is not a proposal of all ALSes. What I have provided above would incorporate your proposal and also that of others. > Right after the selection/election of the ALAC members we could celebrate them and the Board too. No further election, hassle, email correspondence on this issue needed. > Again, avoiding elections isn't really democratic - rather the opposite. I hope that all can find their way to accept the above proposal, which incorporates your proposal, but also everyone elses. > The current text on the website (link below) assumes, there is a ballot, it assumes certain number of seats... this has to be updated. Again, we cannot simply erase the proposals of others. Everyone has a voice here, and everyone's proposals need to be respected. > > This whole procedure is not transparent enough. The following can help: Any text on the website should be posted via email too. Every update to that page has been posted by email, including the immediately-previous posting. > > Best > annette > > Quote from website > "The actual ballot will work as follows: > Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the board nominees. > The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the preferences expressed. > The board members who will be elected are the top 'N' listed, from the top of the list on down. The Number 'N' shall be either: > In the case that no objection is raised to the call's recommendation of seven (7) members: 7 > In the case that an objection is raised, then the number shall be that number from the selection above (5,7,9) which receives the most votes. " > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: "W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.)" <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> > > Gesendet: 11.05.07 11:37:39 > > An: "euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Discussion for At-Large Europe" <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Betreff: [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure > > Priorität: Hoch > > > > > > Hello, > > > > on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read: > > > > "VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the > > Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon > > ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the > > beginning of the voting" > > > > There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong > > recommendation" will be accepted. > > > > Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter > > should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes > > will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no > > need for such a ranking. > > > > After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two > > decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the > > EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members > > are to elect. > > > > Kind Regarts, > > > > Werner Hülsmann > > > > > > #################################################### > > Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es > > nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de > > #################################################### > > > > -- > > > > Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann > > Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. > > Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz > > Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 > > E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EURO-ALS mailing list > > EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > > -- > > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-ALS mailing list > EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] No voting on board seats
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

See below... On 11/05/07, Stefan Hügel <sh(a)fiff.de> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > again, why exclude individuals who are willing to do the work which has to > be done? > > The easiest way to get to a consensual descision would be following the > proposal below. > To avoid an even number of seats, why not reserve a spare seat for future > ALSes (e.g. from > the northern region, which is not represented yet). > This is not correct Stefan. The position adopted in Lisbon was the consensus position of a large proportion of the ALS community. That's reality. What you are proposing is to reconsider a consensus position, not to form one. > At least, we have the objections to 7 seats. But we should go for the best > solution and not > stick to artificial formalities which do not get us on. What we are talking about here are not artificial formalities. We are talking about very basic and fundamental respect for the consensus positions adopted by your colleagues, which you wish to revisit. You are welcome to propose reconsideration of a previous decision. > > So I also propose to assign - in this period - all candidates to the board. > To repeat: Again: If you wish to propose reconsideration of a consensus position adopted by your colleagues, then you need to do that. As I have previously said, in any standard evaluation of how to reconsider a decision, the standard is to have 2/3 of the voting members agree to reconsider a decision - THEN you actually decide on the question - again. This is not artificial, Stefan, this is basic best practices in standard international decision-making. > Best > Stefan > > > > Am 11.05.2007 um 14:42 schrieb Annette Muehlberg: > > > All, > the link has not been updated: > > Strong objections have been raised to the proposal of having only 7 board > seats. > > The alternative proposal was to just take all nominees and let them form the > board (10 in case Sebastian and Veronica are going to be ALAC members, 9 in > case Patrick and Veronika are going to be ALAC members and 9 in case > Sebastian and Patrick are going to be ALAC members) plus the non-voting ALAC > members. > > We just state that for this period, depending on the outcome of the ALAC > selection the board will either have 9 or 10 voting members. > > Right after the selection/election of the ALAC members we could celebrate > them and the Board too. No further election, hassle, email correspondence on > this issue needed. > > > The current text on the website (link below) assumes, there is a ballot, it > assumes certain number of seats... this has to be updated. > > This whole procedure is not transparent enough. The following can help: Any > text on the website should be posted via email too. > > Best > annette > > Quote from website > "The actual ballot will work as follows: > Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the board nominees. > The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the > preferences expressed. > The board members who will be elected are the top 'N' listed, from the top > of the list on down. The Number 'N' shall be either: > In the case that no objection is raised to the call's recommendation of > seven (7) members: 7 > In the case that an objection is raised, then the number shall be that > number from the selection above (5,7,9) which receives the most votes. " > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.)" <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> > Gesendet: 11.05.07 11:37:39 > An: "euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Discussion > for At-Large Europe" <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Betreff: [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure > Priorität: Hoch > > > > > Hello, > > on > https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 > I read: > > "VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the > Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon > ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the > beginning of the voting" > > There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong > recommendation" will be accepted. > > Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter > should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes > will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no > need for such a ranking. > > After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two > decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the > EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members > are to elect. > > Kind Regarts, > > Werner Hülsmann > > > #################################################### > Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es > nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de > #################################################### > > -- > > Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann > Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. > Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz > Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 > E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-ALS mailing list > EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > > -- > > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > > > > -- > Stefan Hügel (sh(a)fiff.de) > > FIfF - Forum InformatikerInnen für Frieden und gesellschaftliche > Verantwortung e.V. > Geschäftsstelle: Goetheplatz 4, D-28203 Bremen > Telefon +49 421 33659255 - Fax +49 421 33659256 - http://www.fiff.de - > fiff(a)fiff.de > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-ALS mailing list > EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Updates to the Elections Page and Details (https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007)
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

Dear All: My apologies that this has taken a couple of hours to get done, but it has been an extremely busy day. Here is the state-of-the-art with respect to the elections process. I hope that the improvements to the table (requested by various ALSes) are helpful: 2007 EURALO Election Details As posted by email by the ICANN staff, incorporating the decisions recommended to the region on the teleconference of 4 May 2007. ELECTION PERIOD: Five Calendar Days, beginning at Noon UTC on the date when the ballot has completed testing, and ending on at Noon UTC on the 5th day. VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the beginning of the voting - Text available from the RALO Organising Instruments page. Current list of MOU signatories can be found at: the MoU Signatories page. CANDIDATES: All those nominated up to the end of the teleconference on 4th May 2007 (see below for complete list) NUMBER OF BOARD SEATS: The strong recommendation of those on the teleconference was that there should be 7 members of the initial board. Since there were objections to this number, then the call's strong recommendation is that there should be a section on the ballot for each voter to pick from amongst the following options for the number of total seats: 5, 7, 9. Voting For the ALAC Candidates: The ballot will work as follows: Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the ALAC candidates. The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the preferences expressed. The candidate receiving the highest preference across all preference votes cast will show at the top of the list; the next-highest directly underneath, and the third preference at the bottom. Since the GC office has ruled that the candidature of Ms. Cretu is in order, there will be three candidates. The terms of the two seats are staggered. Whichever candidate receives the highest preference from amongst all the ranked votes cast shall have the two-year term. The candidate receiving the next- highest ranking shall receive the one year term. The two candidates receiving the highest aggregated preference votes shall be elected. The remaining candidate, (if any) will be subject to election to the Board (see below for details) Voting For the EURALO Board: The ballot for the board will list all of the current nominees for board seats, of which there are eleven (11) (reproduced below and also at Meeting Notes 4 May 2007. This list includes two of the three candidates for ALAC seats,as one candidate has withdrawn his name from consideration for a Board seat. The candidate for an ALAC seat who does not get elected, may be seated as a board member (but see below). No candidate for ALAC may be elected to both an ALAC seat AND a board seat, however. The actual ballot will work as follows: Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the board nominees. The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the preferences expressed. The board members who will be elected are the top 'N' listed, from the top of the list on down. The Number 'N' shall be that number from the selection above (5,7,9) which receives the most votes. TERM OF BOARD MEMBERS: It was not decided on the call how to determine which board members would receive one year terms, and which would receive two, as per the Bylaws, Clause 9.5.2. Therefore, the staff recommends the following: The top 1/2 of the list of preferences from the board election (rounded to the nearest whole number, depending upon the number of seats), will receive two-year terms, and the bottom 1/2 will receive one-year terms. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO OBJECT TO THIS PROCEDURE as this is simply a staff proposal. Keep in mind, however, that it might be viewed as less than ideal to have another ballot, immediately after the first, to decide who shall have what length of term from amongst those elected. VOTING MECHANISM: At-Large uses a voting system provided by BigPulse (www.bigpulse.com) The authorised voter will receive an individualised email, with a clickable link as well as manual login instructions, which are individually-generated. The system will be setup to provide a secret ballot, and the ICANN staff will ensure that the system produces a reminder email 48 hours before the vote closes, and then again 24 hours before the vote closes, to any voter who has not yet voted to help ensure that they do cast a vote. We will also setup a URL where anyone will be able to see the results of the vote for themselves to ensure transparency with respect to the results. This URL will be forwarded to both European email lists. CANDIDATES LIST Christian Name Surname ALS (Country of ALS) Country of Residence Nationality Nominating ALS Board Candidate (Y/N) ALAC Candidate (2 seats) Notes Patrick Vande Walle ISOC Luxembourg (Luxembourg) Luxembourg Belgium ISOC Luxembourg (Self) SN: 07/04/07 Sébastien Bachollet ISOC France (France) France France ISOC Bulgaria (D Pefeva) Nom: Dessi Veronica Cretu netzwerk neue medien (Germany) Moldava Moldova Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Nom: Wolfgang Rudi Vansnick ISOC Belgium (Belgium) Belgium Belgium ISOC Belgium (Self) Yes Vittorio Bertola ISOC Italy (Italy) Italy Italy ISOC Italy (Self) Yes Christoph Bruch GCLU (Germany) Germany Germany ISOC Italy (V Bertola), Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Desiree Miloshevic United Kingdom Serbia Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Bill Drake Switzerland USA Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Jeanette Hofmann Germany Germany Medienstadt Leipzig (W Kleinwachter) Yes Karen Banks UK Australia netzwerk neue medien (A Muehlberg) Yes Wolf Ludwig Switzerland Germany netzwerk neue medien (A Muehlberg) Yes member of Communica.ch, an ALS candidate organisation Paco de Quito ISOC CAT (Spain) Spain Spain ISOC Bulgaria (D Pefeva) Yes Sebastien Bachollet ISOC France (France) France France N/A (ALAC Candidate) Yes (ALAC Candidate) Veronica Cretu netzwerk neue medien (Germany) Moldova Moldova N/A (ALAC Candidate) Yes (ALAC Candidate) For the two ALAC seats Patrick Vande Walle Sebastien Bachollet Veronica Cretu For the EURALO Board Rudi Vansnick Vittorio Bertola Christoph Bruch Desiree Miloshevic Bill Drake Jeanette Hofmann Karen Banks Wolf Ludwig Paco de Qinto Patrick Vande Walle Sebastien Bachollet Veronica Cretu

1 0

No voting on board seats
by Annette Muehlberg May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

All, the link has not been updated: Strong objections have been raised to the proposal of having only 7 board seats. The alternative proposal was to just take all nominees and let them form the board (10 in case Sebastian and Veronica are going to be ALAC members, 9 in case Patrick and Veronika are going to be ALAC members and 9 in case Sebastian and Patrick are going to be ALAC members) plus the non-voting ALAC members. We just state that for this period, depending on the outcome of the ALAC selection the board will either have 9 or 10 voting members. Right after the selection/election of the ALAC members we could celebrate them and the Board too. No further election, hassle, email correspondence on this issue needed. The current text on the website (link below) assumes, there is a ballot, it assumes certain number of seats... this has to be updated. This whole procedure is not transparent enough. The following can help: Any text on the website should be posted via email too. Best annette Quote from website "The actual ballot will work as follows: Each voter will rank, in order of preference, ALL the board nominees. The voting system will then produce a list, which incorporates the preferences expressed. The board members who will be elected are the top 'N' listed, from the top of the list on down. The Number 'N' shall be either: In the case that no objection is raised to the call's recommendation of seven (7) members: 7 In the case that an objection is raised, then the number shall be that number from the selection above (5,7,9) which receives the most votes. " > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.)" <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> > Gesendet: 11.05.07 11:37:39 > An: "euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Discussion for At-Large Europe" <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Betreff: [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure > Priorität: Hoch > > Hello, > > on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read: > > "VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the > Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon > ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the > beginning of the voting" > > There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong > recommendation" will be accepted. > > Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter > should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes > will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no > need for such a ranking. > > After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two > decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the > EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members > are to elect. > > Kind Regarts, > > Werner Hülsmann > > > #################################################### > Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es > nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de > #################################################### > > -- > > Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann > Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. > Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz > Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 > E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-ALS mailing list > EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > --

2 1

Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure
by Annette Muehlberg May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

Until a few days ago, we all thought that for the ALAC voting people would have two possible votes on three candidates. Sebastian pointed out, that he was surprised of the change of voting procedure and did not see why this procedure should be applied on choosing two out of three. I was surprised too and I alos think that it makes more sense to keep the simple version of two possilbe votes for each ALS. Best Annette > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org, Discussion for At-Large Europe <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Gesendet: 11.05.07 13:18:27 > An: "Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette(a)wzb.eu> > CC: Discussion for At-Large Europe <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure > > Jeannette: > > To be completely clear, this procedure was adopted in Lisbon on March > 29th I believe, and this was posted for all ALSes to review > immediately thereafter. > > As a consequence, any ALS - or any person - could have queried this > and a debate could have been had at any point in the last six weeks. > There was no such debate and no questions raised - until now. > > To reiterate my previous point: every decision reached by the > community such as those in Lisbon cannot be re-opened because one or > two decide, after a long interval, to question it. > > The standard decision-making convention in international meetings and > processes is that any decision validly taken may only be reconsidered > if three-quarters of the decision-making body were to decide formally > to reconsider the question. We do not see anything like that level of > interest in doing so in this matter. > > On 11/05/07, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette(a)wzb.eu> wrote: > > Dear Nick, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > > > Verner, and all: > > > > > > Could we please, instead of trying to find things to object to, try > > > and find things to agree on. > > > > > > To repeat: there is no difference in the outcome whether one ranks > > > three candidates, or whether you dispose of two individual votes for a > > > candidate of three. > > > > Usually, voting procedures do have strong effects on the outcome. This > > is why they are an issue in almost every country. Think of the debates > > on the advantages and disadvantages of majority systems and > > prepresentattional systems. > > I think this new procedural debate would stop instantly if you could > > bring some proof that these two voting systems produce indeed the very > > same results. > > This is why asked whether we have some information on the results of > > both systems. > > thank you. jeanette > > > > > > > > HOWEVER: insisting on changing everything because one or two > > > individuals want to change what was agreed by a much larger group of > > > ALSes in Lisbon is basically the same as suggesting that any one ALS > > > can veto any decision reached by a much larger group of ALSes. > > > > > > This would result in nothing ever being achieved. > > > > > > On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> wrote: > > > > > >>Hello, > > >> > > >>my first question: "noon UTC" is 1 pm GMT? > > >> > > >>For the ALAC-Seats the rankingsystems makes for me no sense and it seems > > >>to be not democratical for such a few seats to elecect. Therefor we > > >>should use for the election of the ALAC-Seats tweo possible Votes for > > >>each voter. > > >> > > >>Greatings, > > >> > > >>Werner > > >> > > >>Nick Ashton-Hart schrieb: > > >> > > >>>Verner: > > >>> > > >>>Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or > > >>>not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the > > >>>ALAC members and the board members. > > >>> > > >>>That vote will start today. > > >>> > > >>>With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon > > >>>as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward > > >>>to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly > > >>>recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level > > >>>it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce > > >>>confusion. > > >>> > > >>>On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> > > >>>wrote: > > >>> > > >>>>Hello, > > >>>> > > >>>>on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read: > > >>>> > > >>>>"VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the > > >>>>Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon > > >>>>ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the > > >>>>beginning of the voting" > > >>>> > > >>>>There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong > > >>>>recommendation" will be accepted. > > >>>> > > >>>>Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter > > >>>>should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes > > >>>>will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no > > >>>>need for such a ranking. > > >>>> > > >>>>After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two > > >>>>decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the > > >>>>EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members > > >>>>are to elect. > > >>>> > > >>>>Kind Regarts, > > >>>> > > >>>>Werner Hülsmann > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >>#################################################### > > >>Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es > > >>nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de > > >>#################################################### > > >> > > >>-- > > >> > > >>Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann > > >>Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz > > >>Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 > > >>E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de > > >> > > >> > > >>_______________________________________________ > > >>EURO-ALS mailing list > > >>EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > -- > Regards, > > Nick Ashton-Hart > PO Box 32160 > London N4 2XY > United Kingdom > UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 > USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 > Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 > mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 > Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / > Skype: nashtonhart > Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > --

2 1

At-Large Request for an Issues Report on Domain Tasting
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

Dear Community: I am pleased to forward you the email below. At-Large has now become the first advisory committee ever to request an Issues Report of the GNSO Council on an issue of policy. The report is to be delivered to the GNSO Council by 24th May 2007. The At-Large request was supported by other ICANN constituencies, thanks in large part to the hard work of ALAC GNSO Liaison Alan Greenberg. Having multiple constituencies supporting a request like this is very important to the next steps in the Policy Development Process. The supporting constituencies are: Registry Constituency Commercial and Business Constituency Intellectual Property Constituency For those of you who are not familiar with the process which the request for an Issues Report is part of, please review the Description of the GNSO and Policy Development Process documents available in 4 languages at: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi? lisbon_documents Begin forwarded message: > Resent-From: Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org> > From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> > Date: 9 May 2007 05:11:08 BDT > Resent-To: Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton(a)spamcop.net> > To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: Request for Issues Report on Domain Tasting > > >> To: GNSO Council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> >> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >> Subject: Request for Issues Report on Domain Tasting >> >> Dear Council members, >> >> The At-Large Advisory Committee is requesting that ICANN staff >> prepare an Issues Report on Domain Tasting. The formal request is >> attached. >> >> According to ICANN Bylaws, no action is required from Council at >> this time. Once the Issues Report is delivered to the GNSO, >> Council must then decide whether or not to initiate a PDP. >> >> Alan_______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- > lists.icann.org > > www.alac.icann.org > www.icannalac.org

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

Jeannette: To be completely clear, this procedure was adopted in Lisbon on March 29th I believe, and this was posted for all ALSes to review immediately thereafter. As a consequence, any ALS - or any person - could have queried this and a debate could have been had at any point in the last six weeks. There was no such debate and no questions raised - until now. To reiterate my previous point: every decision reached by the community such as those in Lisbon cannot be re-opened because one or two decide, after a long interval, to question it. The standard decision-making convention in international meetings and processes is that any decision validly taken may only be reconsidered if three-quarters of the decision-making body were to decide formally to reconsider the question. We do not see anything like that level of interest in doing so in this matter. On 11/05/07, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette(a)wzb.eu> wrote: > Dear Nick, > > Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > > Verner, and all: > > > > Could we please, instead of trying to find things to object to, try > > and find things to agree on. > > > > To repeat: there is no difference in the outcome whether one ranks > > three candidates, or whether you dispose of two individual votes for a > > candidate of three. > > Usually, voting procedures do have strong effects on the outcome. This > is why they are an issue in almost every country. Think of the debates > on the advantages and disadvantages of majority systems and > prepresentattional systems. > I think this new procedural debate would stop instantly if you could > bring some proof that these two voting systems produce indeed the very > same results. > This is why asked whether we have some information on the results of > both systems. > thank you. jeanette > > > > > HOWEVER: insisting on changing everything because one or two > > individuals want to change what was agreed by a much larger group of > > ALSes in Lisbon is basically the same as suggesting that any one ALS > > can veto any decision reached by a much larger group of ALSes. > > > > This would result in nothing ever being achieved. > > > > On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> wrote: > > > >>Hello, > >> > >>my first question: "noon UTC" is 1 pm GMT? > >> > >>For the ALAC-Seats the rankingsystems makes for me no sense and it seems > >>to be not democratical for such a few seats to elecect. Therefor we > >>should use for the election of the ALAC-Seats tweo possible Votes for > >>each voter. > >> > >>Greatings, > >> > >>Werner > >> > >>Nick Ashton-Hart schrieb: > >> > >>>Verner: > >>> > >>>Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or > >>>not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the > >>>ALAC members and the board members. > >>> > >>>That vote will start today. > >>> > >>>With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon > >>>as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward > >>>to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly > >>>recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level > >>>it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce > >>>confusion. > >>> > >>>On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> > >>>wrote: > >>> > >>>>Hello, > >>>> > >>>>on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read: > >>>> > >>>>"VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the > >>>>Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon > >>>>ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the > >>>>beginning of the voting" > >>>> > >>>>There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong > >>>>recommendation" will be accepted. > >>>> > >>>>Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter > >>>>should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes > >>>>will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no > >>>>need for such a ranking. > >>>> > >>>>After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two > >>>>decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the > >>>>EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members > >>>>are to elect. > >>>> > >>>>Kind Regarts, > >>>> > >>>>Werner Hülsmann > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>#################################################### > >>Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es > >>nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de > >>#################################################### > >> > >>-- > >> > >>Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann > >>Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz > >>Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 > >>E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>EURO-ALS mailing list > >>EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > >> > > > > > > > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

All ALSes Have Now Signed the MoU!
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

Dear All: With the digital signature of FITUG this monring (thanks Hanno), all ALSes have now signed the MoU. I think this is a positive milestone for Europe - one which has been worked towards for years - and one which I hope all of you welcome. There is therefore no reason to hold a vote on whether or not non-MoU parties can vote in this election, since there are at present no such organisations. However, the construction of the vote on the main questions - ALAC members, number of board seats, and the board members - is still being prepared in the voting software, so it will not begin at Noon UTC today as we still need to finish testing it to ensure that it does work as described. What we can do is to start the vote at Noon UTC on the day when it is ready, and run it for the same length of time as it would have run if it started today - 5 days. I cannot precisely say which day this will be - we may need some advice from the software provider; we may not - and it is Friday today. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Vote on changing of voting rules starts today
by Annette Muehlberg May 11, 2007

May 11, 2007

All, if something takes place where people have to take action this should be transparent in the title of the mail (and several days in advance...). This is, why I resend this mail. So voting on the questions if voting rights should be limited to those ALSes who have signed the MOU will take place from today until wednesday. For clarification: No other voting on any issue will take place until this decision has been taken. best annette > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org, Discussion for At-Large Europe <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Gesendet: 11.05.07 12:03:31 > An: "W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.)" <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> > CC: euro-als(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, "euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Discussion for At-Large Europe" <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure > > Verner: > > Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or > not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the > ALAC members and the board members. > > That vote will start today. > > With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon > as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward > to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly > recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level > it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce > confusion. > > On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann(a)datenschutzverein.de> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read: > > > > "VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the > > Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon > > ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the > > beginning of the voting" > > > > There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong > > recommendation" will be accepted. > > > > Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter > > should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes > > will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no > > need for such a ranking. > > > > After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two > > decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the > > EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members > > are to elect. > > > > Kind Regarts, > > > > Werner Hülsmann > > > > > > #################################################### > > Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es > > nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de > > #################################################### > > > > -- > > > > Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann > > Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. > > Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz > > Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 > > E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EURO-ALS mailing list > > EURO-ALS(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > > > -- > -- > Regards, > > Nick Ashton-Hart > PO Box 32160 > London N4 2XY > United Kingdom > UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 > USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 > Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 > mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 > Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / > Skype: nashtonhart > Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > --

1 0