Hi, Again, without comment on the current set of candidates or even the process on how they got to be candidates, this sounds like a really good idea. a. On 27 May 2011, at 11:16, Christopher Wilkinson wrote:
In this respect, for future reference, I would recommend that EURALO elections be conducted by a neutral election committee supported by the ICANN staff.
I would also recommend that candidates be nominated and seconded individually by member ALS's. Since EURALO wants to have larger numbers of ALS ("outreach") and greater participation from within member ALS ("inreach"), then I suggest that we could begin right here. Contrariwise, if the whole "ticket" is nominated internally, I can think of no better way of turning off the potential interest of newcomers. (And we need them, many.)
Finally, I would turn to our individual members. At this stage in the development of EURALO, I suggest that our individual members enjoy neither the representativity nor the mandate to act as officers of EURALO. Those individual members who wish to exercise a mandate in At Large - and thankfully there are some - should give priority to creating their corresponding ALS's, as provided for in the amended EURALO Statutes. Otherwise, yet again, EURALO and ALAC lay themselves open to the characterisation of a self-perpetuating group of ICANN insiders. None of us want that.