that only those who have signed the MoU may vote in the election.
provided in the relevant clauses of the MoU.
There are at present only three ALSes who have not yet signed the MoU.
Hopefully this will meet with general understanding.
Dear Nick, dear colleagues,
I am not sure if it is a good idea to artificially restrict the number of
board members. As there is a lot of work to do, why exclude individuals who
are willing to do that work?
It is also not plausible to me, why Annettes suggestion endangers the
progress of the election. We should strive together for the best possible
solution and not build up pressure against alternative opinions.
Unfortunately, I have to state that I object to the recommendation to have a
board of seven. Instead, in my opinion, we should at least have a board of 9
elected members. Even better, we should not exclude anyone.
Additionally I would object to the recommendation to let only the signers of
the MoU vote. All accredited ALSes should have the right to vote, as it was
discussed earlier.
Best
Stefan
Am 09.05.2007 um 17:24 schrieb Nick Ashton-Hart:
To be clear, does this mean that you are objecting to the
recommendation from the teleconference that we have a board of 7?
Currently there are not nine, but twelve candidates, since the three
ALAC members are included, understanding that the two ALAC
representatives elected would not be board members; the ALAC
representative who is not elected could become a board member, if
(following what was published after the recent teleconference) they
were in the top 5, 7, or 9 chosen in the elections to take place
starting this Friday.
I hope very much Annette that you are not objecting to the vote for
the number of directors at least - of choosing between 5, 7, or 9
directors. If you are objecting to that, please so state -
understanding that if you do you endanger the entire election going
forward, and risk throwing everything back to square one again. I VERY
much hope you will agree that doing that would be highly undesirable.
On 09/05/07, Annette Muehlberg <Annette.Muehlberg@
web.de> wrote:
It is the whole procedure of the last weeks I do not want "to live with".
Below I tried to reunite all ALSes and volunteers for functions so that we
could focus on constructive work. It implicated that we accept all those who
were nominated for the board without any further voting. (Thank you Stefan,
for your support.)
If instead voting does take place my proposal implies that for this first
phase we should have a board of ten plus the three non-voting ALAC members.
Apart from that, there has to be a transparent and democratic procedure in
place if the rights of some ALSes are supposed to be changed.
We could get rid of all these discussions if we were implementing my
proposal below and follow our own bylaws.
Best
Annette
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Gesendet: 09.05.07 13:45:15
CC: "Discussion for At-Large Europe"
Muehlberg" <annette.muehlberg@
web.de>
Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] follow our own bylaws
It is worth pointing out that every other region managed to take the
steps which Roberto mentions in respect of LAC with the same results,
and little controversy.
I would urge you all, once again, to use maximum flexibility and to
give everyone else the benefit of the doubt to the maximum extent
possible.
I am encouraged to see that, so far, since the strong recommendations
of the last teleconference was published, there have been some
statements which disagree with one element or another to an extent,
but none of you have said "this element I cannot live with".
Maybe we should follow the example of the LAC colleagues.
I arrived earlier in Sao Paulo, to participate in their workshop, pretty
much as I arrived earlier in Lisbon, to participate in the EURALO workshop.
It was a very intense experience. In spite of the additional difficulty to
keep documents in two languages synchronized, and the interpretation
interface, work proceeded smoothly. At the end, all documents, including the
LACRALO-ICANN MoU, were ready. They were signed on the spot, no ALS did
raise any issue or reservation about the signature, the representatives were
elected (all ALSes who had signed the MoU participated in the election),
there were more candidates than seats but the election process was concluded
without problems, and with the best compliments to the winners coming from
the ones that did not make it that time, but that expressed their
willingness to help anyway.
We started very well, with the "spirit of Frankfurt", as Annette mentions,
then something started getting wrong. I hoped things were back on track when
I assisted to the very collaborative and energetic meeting, that ended with
the final drafting of the documents, including the EURALO-ICANN MoU, and the
very touching signature ceremony, with all ALSes present and signing on
stage. Then something started again getting wrong: holiday period, delays in
getting the candidate list, "I signed it but I thought it meant something
different", "I am not confortable in signing it", "I don't see why we should
sign it", "I don't understand why we are rushing (?!?) it", "Why don't we
wait some more", "there should be consensus, not a voting (but of course the
consensus must be on what I say, not on something different)", and so on.
Yes, the problem is to find this collaborative spirit again. At this time we
do have an agreed set of documents, including the EURALO-ICANN MoU, a set of
procedures for electing officers, and deadlines. While a modification of the
documents and of the rules is always possible in the future, I have to note
that the European Region lacks a member since December 2006, when Annette
was not replaced because the formation of EURALO was imminent, and the
replacement had better be elected by the new organization, and that any
further delay in making EURALO operational would be ununderstandable and
unacceptable.
As I said in a previos message, I am still confident that the MoU is signed
by the few residual ALSes in due time to participate in the elections, that
the elected officers will hold their office in the interest of the whole
community, and that those who do not get elected this time still contribute
and get prepared to provide a good alternative for the next future election.
This is how it works in other parts of the ICANN family (the ASO has just
concluded its voting, and Raimundo Beca has been appointed for a second term
to the Board), how it did work for the LACRALO, and I don't see why it
should not work for EURALO.
Cheers,
Roberto
________________________________
Behalf Of Stefan Hügel
Sent: 09 May 2007 12:38
To: Annette Muehlberg; EURALO Discussion
Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] follow our own bylaws
Dear colleagues,
first of all, thanks to Annette for your statement I fully agree with.
Having been silent most of the time up to now (I may have to apologize for
that), it is exactly the spirit of working together in a cooperative manner,
which I miss in many of the discussions here.
It sometimes seems to me like it is all about legal issues - and nothing
else. How can participation work, if you have to go through pages of legal
arguments to follow any discussion?
As Annette said - let us start working together on content, on outreach, on
issues significant for ICANN policies. And let's stop these formal
arguments, which do not let us achieve any progress.
Best
Stefan
Am 08.05.2007 um 19:12 schrieb Annette Muehlberg:
Dear all,
We started off to build the EURALO in such a good spirit that we even called
our report on our kick off Meeting in Frankfurt May 2006 "The spirit of
Frankfurt".
Where are we now? After Lisbon an absurd discussion about deadlines of
nomination periods started which almost lead to the exclusion of those ALS
representatives who were in easter vacation.
Now, a legal advice is asked for on a nomination of a candidate as if it
matters if someone became a member of an ALS during nomination period or at
the first day of the period of discussion of the nominations - both
definately before the actual decision taking/voting on the candidates.
All this is such a bureaucratic argy-bargy (german: Hickhack).
We do not need to love each other but should be able to respect and work
with each other: cooperative, not trying to exclude but to integrate
different positions.
In short, we should start to follow our own bylaws:
- as stated for Board and General assembly we should operate "to the maximum
extent possible via consensus" (9.2.21 and 9.4.17.1)
- "The Association shall at all times act in an open, accountable and
transparent manner and is committed to cultural and geographic diversity and
gender balance in its work internally and externally." (3.4)
The current state is:
- We have one candidate seconded by the european consumer protection/civil
liberties ALSes who are not ISOC members. This candidate comes from Moldova,
is female, comes from a non-EU country with a rather developing
IT-infrastructure.
We have two candidates from Luxembourg and France, both male, both EU, both
western region, both members of the same umbrella organisation, seconded by
all the members of the very same organisation - ISOC).
Let us take our bylaws serious concerning diversity and reaching consensus
among us. In this case the latter means, let us both accept, that there are
more or less two equally strong opinions expressed and try to have a fair
representation of both postions.
- We have nine nominees for the board and agreed to have the one join, who
will not make it in the selection for the ALAC (and all three ALAC members
will join as non-voting members).
This is great!
Instead of trying to put each other down and vote out, we should be happy
that we have these great people who are willing to serve the EURALO board
and stop all this destructive stuff. Let us welcome all to the EURALO Board!
Let us start working together on content, on outreach, on issues significant
for ICANN policies.
Best
Annette
--
FIfF - Forum InformatikerInnen für Frieden und gesellschaftliche
Verantwortung e.V.
Geschäftsstelle: Goetheplatz 4, D-28203 Bremen
_______________________________________________
EURO-Discuss mailing list
--
--
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
Skype: nashtonhart
--
--
--
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
Skype: nashtonhart
_______________________________________________
EURO-Discuss mailing list
--
FIfF - Forum InformatikerInnen für Frieden und gesellschaftliche
Verantwortung e.V.
Geschäftsstelle: Goetheplatz 4, D-28203 Bremen