Good morning, having been on ICANN'n nomcom twice, I can confirm that several board members didn't meet the requirements you find necessary for an ALAC seat. The nomcom has appointed people who were plain and simple newbies. From what I know, nobody has ever complained about this fact. Now I wonder if the selection criteria for ALAC should be more rigorous than for the board and if so why? jeanette Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
Thanks Nick.
I think this demonstrates that the Euralo MoU and bylaws need clarifications, so that the letter is in line with the spirit.
I think the spirit in requiring that an ALAC representative is a member of an ALS is that the candidate needs several months to get up to speed with the ALAC-specific business, both in content and process. This could be demonstrated by prior activity in ALAC and/or ICANN related mailing lists, meetings attendance, etc. Afterwards, if the ALS estimates the candidate meet these criteria, it can use whatever internal process it see fit to ratify the candidacy and propose it to the Euralo.
My personal suggestion is that an ALAC candidate should be a member of an ALS for at least six months before the elections take place. It is obviously too late for this round, but let us avoid further possibilities for interpretation before the next round.
Patrick
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...