See below... On 11/05/07, Stefan Hügel <sh@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@datenschutzverein.de> Gesendet: 11.05.07 11:37:39 An: "euro-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Discussion for At-Large Europe" <euro-discuss@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.icann...
--
_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...
-- Stefan Hügel (sh@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@fiff.de
_______________________________________________ EURO-ALS mailing list EURO-ALS@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.icann...
-- -- 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@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart