[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Voting Director AT Large From: to presidencia@internauta.org.ar Dear Jose Ovid: Your email has made me reflect on some subjectsthat I create must of being high-priority at the time of entering to raise us the support to some person it stops to enter to board by the users. I understand that to who we give our endorsement him it must of being a person with a fort to loop with the end users of Internet. It must know in clearly that its function is to represent the users firmly and in freedom of action, with the only pressure of knowing how itself responsible to express opinions and positions that they respect them point of view that spill different the THIN ones. I am convinced that the work and the decisions that are taken in ALAC and the THIN ones by part of the users doubtlessly benefits the organization, I believe that to understand that what one becomes for benefit of the users is against ICANN, puts to us in a place incomodo and very undesirable. I continue insisting like the first day that our organization entranceto ICANN, that I inhale a a cuatripartito and egalitarian Co-government (academic companies, users, sectors and governments), but I am not foolish and also first passage seems to me important east that they are 1 voice against 22 or 23, since the important thing of that voice is that it can modify some position, can contribute with a glance of "user" the diverse forms to see the "World of Internet ", mainly the one of the Names and Numbers of Dominion, and also that can without place to doubts to cause that others to their side also accompany that same position. I do not understand but that we are voting. It will be perhaps that we are voting the entrance of a person who is not going to consider our vision, nor the necessities of the users? if it is thus sothat we would vote it? We would be in that line of thought choosing to our twig? On the other hand I ask myself on this interchange of mails that has followed one another in the list. There was no sufficient time so that are possible to be presented/displayed the candidates, There was also no a commission that I evaluate to those who appeared? It is good for the institucionalidad of ICANN that these three candidates appear untimely and by outside the evaluation commission? (I create to understand that thus it was but it is thus I request excuses) With respect and cordiality Sergio Saline I carry Original Message From: "Jose Ovid Salgueiro A." <jsalgueiro@cantv.net> To: "' Internautá Presidency" <presidencia@internauta.org.ar>; <cveraq@gmail.com>; "' Andrés Piazzá" <andrespiazza@gmail.com>; <lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: <lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 11:47 A.M. Subject: RE: [ lac-discuss-is ] Voting Director AT Large We must be clear in a thing, the cause that is a Director designated by the users it does not mean at all that it is there stops to protect to us or to benefit to us. According to the ICANN statutes the directors they are there for making the decisions that benefit the organization. Even though the designated director had interest in favoring the users (against the statutory forecasts), a vote of 22 or 23 is single. Said this, it wanted to mention both with respect to candidates who are asked for the support of the THIN one to be postulated, not even it stops to support them, that if it comes I am in agreement with Adrián as far as qualifications of Avri Doria, shine to me outside place to askfor support in one community which never it took care of and with that never it interacted, to difference of JJ Subrenat that if it always supported it and it interacted with her. We were few the members of the THIN one that we interacted with these people and for that reason I believe that feedback is important east. Jose Ovid Salgueiro A. salgueiro.jo@gmail.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/27ae8c65e7.html --]]