Jeanette, If there is a misunderstanding, and you did not mean to accuse ICANN of maintaining ambiguous practices or stretching rules, I offer my deepest public apologies. Best regards, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette@wz-berlin.de] Sent: 13 December 2006 14:09 To: Roberto Gaetano Cc: 'Discussion for At-Large Europe' Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election Results
Roberto Gaetano wrote:
Jeannette,
I am sorry to say, but you are completely off the mark.
What a rude way of addressing somebody on a public list! May I suggest that you treat differences in opinion with a bit more respect?
ICANN has nothing to do in all this.
There is apparently a misunderstanding. I never said that ICANN should make rules for ALAC. What I said is that ICANN and ALAC share a disease. The disease as I see it is a lack of self-binding rules and/or sometimes an inclination to stretch existing rules. My recommendation was that ALAC should try to be a model in terms of "constitutionalizing" ICANN and its sub organizations. I repeat this just as a matter of clarification. The discussion has moved on, and I support both Wolfgang's and Thomas' constributions.
jeanette
ICANN gives some general rules for
self-organizing of constituencies, committees, and associated bodies. But then (and this is what is called "bottom-up" process) it gives some latitude in implementing it. I would be appalled in seeing ICANN board setting rules for the IP constituency. Or the NCUC. Why then for ALAC? Why, all of a sudden, we call on ICANN to set rules on how ALAC appoints its Boar Liaison?
The problem is completely a different one. And it has to do with funding. It is obvious to whoever would look at things abstracting from names, and looking at functions, that all what we are talking about is if ICANN would pay for a Board Liaison "on top" of the regular 15 members of the committee. It is obvious to whoever has done any one negotiation that if you state the problem up front, the answer from the (General Counsel of the) "counterpart" is extremely unlikely to be something like "Oh, yes, actually, why not even more than just one".
Anyway, Vittorio has been elected as ALAC Liaison to the Board, by ALAC plenary, who is, according to the Bylaws, the body who is responsible for the election. He is currently an ALAC member, and this should close the question until EURALO is formed. All clear, and compliant to the Bylaws. About additional alternate candidates, that are not members of ALAC, I personally cannot see how some person from outside the Committee could have the trust of ALAC and won an election against two strong and long time members like Vittorio and Wendy. In simple terms, we should not make confusion between somebody that has long membership, and the membership terminates, and a person coming from the outside, no matter how involved in other user-related organizations.
My "no waves approach" is a suggestion to ALAC for the future. Whether you take it, and gain results, or you reject it, and stay put, is your choice. If Vittorio's term as ALAC ends before his term as Liaison, you have the choice. I see three possibilities: - insist that he remains Liaison, and get the implicit right of having additional funding; - declare him ceased, go to new elections, create a precedent and lose forever the right of having additional funding; - replace him with a different person, also outside ALAC, and claim that if the rules allow an outside person, elections should be open to non-member candidates (which seems to be your point)
The question is, how are you going to motivate that you go to option 3, instead of 2? ICANN's reply will be, obviously, that you are welcome to go to option 2, and you can forget forever about option 3 (and 1, for that matter).
On one thing I agree with you, this is not a perfect world. Maybe where we differ is on how to change it.
Best regards, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette@wz-berlin.de] Sent: 08 December 2006 11:49 To: Discussion for At-Large Europe; roberto@icann.org Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election Results
Roberto Gaetano schrieb:
I don't think that this was the situation "by design", but rather a side effect on how the bylaws are written.
Hi Roberto,
this is the problem with ICANN as I see it since I watch its performance. There are always honorable reasons for maintaining ambiguous practices or stretching rules. But from the outside, such practices look somewhat fishy.
In order to grow up and to gain the trust ICANN needs to do its work, it is really, really necessary that ICANN establishes an equivalent to the rule of law, an equivalent that provides for reliable procedures and predictable decisions.
Your small steps, no big waves approach makes sense from an insider's perpective but from outside, it looks like more of the same muddling through approach that seems so characterstic for many of ICANN's decisions.
I know, I am repeating myself, I said the very same thing on another list a few days ago: ICANN needs to constitutionlize itself, its actions need to follow self binding rules that people know and that people can appeal to if they are supposedly violated. ALAC should not be an exception to this but rather a model for other constiuencies or groups in ICANN.
jeanette
We are getting there with small steps, not to create too big waves. We did it with Bret as GTLD Liaison, in the moment when we
were also
replacing another NA member (John Levine was selected). We are trying this with Vittorio, as the situation is now that it would take an active step by the Board to discontinue him after his expiration as ALAC member, and I don't think that the Board
will ever open this can of worms.
Then we will much better off for claiming it as established
practice.
This is, at least, my approach. Sorry for being more
careful than some
of you would like, but I have the impression that this strategy has paid off, up to now. Also, I do believe that one thing is a
proposal
for candidature that comes from an ALS, and another thing,
with more
weight, will be a candidature that comes from a established RALO. Cheers, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann Sent: 08 December 2006 10:03 To: Discussion for At-Large Europe Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election Results
Roberto Gaetano schrieb:
Two additions to the comprehensive explanation by Vittorio.
There is nothing that prevents Vittorio to continue as
Board Liaison
even if he terminates as ALAC member. Quite the contrary,
this is an
advantage, as we will have the possibility to cover this
task without
impacting on the other activities, that will be carried on by the regular members. It was already the case for Bret as GTLD Liaison.
Now, this is interesting. Anybody can be nominated or run for the position as board liaison? If this is indeed the case, you
might have
got a long list of candidates if this had been known to
more people.
jeanette
In the future, ALSes and RALOs will be able to influence also the internal mechanisms, if they discuss the matter in
advance and via
their two representatives can bring motions to the ALAC.
This, based
on what is discussed above, might include candidatures to Liaison positions (but not Chair or Vice Chair positions).
Cheers, Roberto
>-----Original Message----- >From: euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On
Behalf Of
>Vittorio Bertola >Sent: 08 December 2006 09:19 >To: patrick@isoc.lu; Discussion for At-Large Europe >Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election >Results > >Patrick Vande Walle ha scritto: > >>A few days ago, it was explained on this list that the
nomcom chair
>>would suggest a name for the ALAC liaison. Now we see
that the ALAC
>>actually had a vote. Who decided that and when ? Who voted > >in favour > >>on this change ? who voted against ? > >I think that there is a misunderstanding. The message that
was sent
>some time ago was about appointing one new ALAC member
representing
>EURALO, since Annette, who was previously sitting in one
of the two
>EURALO seats, decided to apply for Roberto's seat - the one >representing ICANN and appointed by the ICANN Nomcom - and
the Nomcom
>picked her. Thus, this frees up one of the two EURALO
seats, which,
>until we formally incorporate EURALO and sign an MoU with
ICANN, is
>to be filled by the ICANN Board. As soon as we sign that
MoU, the
>ICANN-Board-appointed ALAC members (they being me and
whoever will
>get appointed in place of Annette in the next few weeks)
will expire,
>and EURALO will have to appoint two representatives in the ALAC. > >The ICANN Board, however, usually asks for advice before
making the
>appointment; initially, since this is going to be a short-lived >appointment - we hope to finalize the EURALO process by
the ICANN
>Lisbon meeting, next March - Roberto and I suggested
that we could
>ask the Nomcom to provide another name, which would have
allowed the
>Board to make a very quick appointment, and thus to bring the >appointed person here in Sao Paulo for this ICANN meeting.
However,
>there was another proposal that the three European ALAC
members pick
>someone instead. I strongly disagree on that, because I
think that if
>we don't go for a quick appointment, then it should be the
ALSes who
>suggest someone, also because it might be someone that the ALSes >might want to reappoint after we sign the MoU in March
(though there
>is absolutely no constraint to that effect). So we discussed the >matter here in Sao Paulo, and all the three European
ALAC members
>agreed to make a call to the European ALSes to suggest
one or more
>names, to be then discussed and forwarded to the ICANN Board for >consideration; Annette is supposed to post that call shortly. > >In any case, please all of you start considering and
posting possible
>nominees (or self-nominations) as temporary European
ALAC member,
>even if it might be just for a few months and for one
ICANN meeting
>in Lisbon. Also, I want to make it clear that I will not
reapply for
>my seat, I think that four years is enough and I really
want some new
>people from this group to be able to serve on the ALAC (I
said this
>in public before being appointed as ALAC Board liaison, so
it's not
>connected to that). > >The message that Nick sent yesterday, instead, was about
the internal
>ALAC appointments: the ALAC, as any Committee, has to
appoint its
>Chair, Vice Chairs, and also a number of liaisons to
other bodies.
>These positions are to be filled internally by the ALAC, as they >represent the distribution of labour among its members. In this >specific case, there was no established procedure, and even no >advance knowledge of all the nominations, so it was actually >impossible to have any further consultation - it was all decided >yesterday at an open meeting of the ALAC. I still see it a bit >difficult to imagine that these positions can be filled by
a broader
>group than the ALAC itself, since they are really connected to >internal balances in a 15-people group that has to work
together, but
>I already suggested that the ALAC should have better
procedures for
>these appointments, which could allow sufficient time to have a >consultation with the RALOs about the various nominees. > >Ciao, >-- >vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] >bertola.eu.org]<----- >http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... > >_______________________________________________ >EURO-Discuss mailing list >EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a >tlarge-lists.icann.org
_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss _atlarge-
l
ists.icann.org
_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a tlarge-lists.icann.org
_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a tlarge-lists.icann.org