Jose, I agree.

Given that the nomination process is still open, I think that discussion of negative characteristics or previous voting is extremely premature and prejudicial.

I would hope that any accusations of conflict or any other issues arising with regard to ANY and ALL candidates would be brought up in the meetings and list BEFORE the election, and not AFTER, as was recently done, and which caused so much confusion. The rules are clear as to who is NOT eligible. Everyone else is eligible, even if they were nominated in a previous process. As you said, unless the ALS is decertified and the person is no longer a member. Given that this is not the case for any nominated candidate so far, I suggest we welcome participation of ALL nominees, without trying to finagle a disqualification that is not supported by the rules.

After all, it is a democratic process that we are undergoing, is it not? And it would be HIGHLY UNFAIR to prejudice this NEW process before it even begins, wouldn't it? That might even be a matter for the Ombudsman.

Jacqueline

Jacqueline A. Morris

Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and Free. (after Chris Lehmann )

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 2:30 PM, <josefranciscoarce@gmail.com> wrote:

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

Subject: Re:??? Q = utf-8 Nominaci = C3 = B3n_para_ALAC =
From: josefranciscoarce@gmail.com

Dear Eduardo,
Thank you for your kind email.
I tell you my point of view, maybe a little more clarification.
Lance has not reached the number of votes and many say they have
conflict of interest, not the disabled to be nominated again.
To do so, those who believe that Lance has this conflict should
you initiate or request a due process being followed to decertify their ALS. Only so
May not be suitable.
I do not think this happens because my view is that all this happened,
only in order to be able to apply for another person. But the logic and
common sense dictate otherwise.
Also remember that many voted positively by., But then was
the only candidate. We will now see what happens if there are 3 or more. It will put
interesting.

I hope I have clarified the picture.

Cheers

Joseph
The Aug.20, 2015 24:14, "Eduado Mendez" <eduardo@mendez.net.ve> wrote:

> Saludos José, espero que estés bien!
>
> Tu propuesta me produce una gran interrogante y consiste simplemente en
> saber si un candidato que no fue considerado positivamente por una parte
> importante de los miembros de esta lista, pueda ser postulado nuevamente.
>
> Un abrazo
>
> Eduardo Méndez
> Internauta Venezuela
>
>
> El 20/08/2015, a las 9:57 a.m., José Francisco Arce <
> josefranciscoarce@gmail.com> escribió:
>
> Estimados,
>
> Quiero nominar a Lance Hinds para el cargo de ALAC.
> Personalmente creo que posee todas las cualidades para hacer un gran
> desempeño y la experiencia que se esta buscando.
> Ademas de que despues de haber pasado por muchos mal entendidos en la
> unica postulacion anterior, merece estar nuevamente postulado.
> Manteniendo mi honestidad intelectual.
>
> Saludos
>
> Jose Arce
> Amtics
> _______________________________________________
> lac-discuss-es mailing list
> lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
> http://www.lacralo.org
>
>
>

[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/c94e40c6a3.html
--]]

_______________________________________________
lac-discuss-en mailing list
lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en