Dear Colleagues: Last week the question of quorum in LACRALO proceedings came up for discussion on our teleconference. I wish to offer a few thoughts for the membership. My colleague Carlos Aguirre rightly made the point that LACRALO was an independent organisation organized within its own needs as determined by the membership within the context of an MOU with ICANN that defines it entire relationship. Since we are severally subscribed to the MOU, we can all attest to the truth of Carlos' observation and which has my support. This aside, I do not believe it degrades LACRALO's independence if we were to follow Vanda's suggestion that we review our operating instruments, including the matter of quorum for meetings, against practices in other regions and ASOs within the context of implementing best practices for LACRALO. LACRALO has declared and adopted consensus as the first choice practice in decision-making. Quorum is important to the extent that LACRALO business, be it procedural or non-procedural, cannot proceed absent one. It becomes acutely important if decisions are to be made upon results of a vote. Voting is the alternate - and less desirable! - method for decision-making since LACRALO is committed to decision-making by consensus. For the f2f meetings in general and General Assembly (GA) specifically, the extant Rules of Procedure (ROP) Rule 6.1 declares that a quorum is a simple majority of the ALS "present and represented". I suspect the worry is created by the interpretation of "present and represented". Our original inference is that the registration exercise before the meeting would deliver the data on the complement of ALS present and represented. With regard to virtual meetings and specific to our monthly teleconferences, LACRALO decided that quorum is established when nine (9) member ALS are represented. Specific to a virtual GA, the ROP sensibly junks Rules 6. Now, the quorum requirement doesn't go away but achieving quorate status becomes a little more complex. Not only does it require a simple majority of ALS to be "present and represented" but we establish a time duration within which they must be present and represented. This time duration mimics the registration period of f2f GA. If and when a division is called and a vote is requested, a simple majority of the ALS present and voting may settle procedural questions. However, non-procedural questions brought to vote can only be decided by 2/3rds of the total vote of ALS "present and voting", subject to Rule 12.9. This means that questions like, for example, amending the ROP, can only be decided upon receipt of 66% of the eligible vote, subject again to Rule 12.9. Warm regards, Carlton Samuels -- +========+++++++++++++++====== Carlton A Samuels Strategies for Education Technologies and Curriculum Development, Process Engineering & Improvement, ICT Policy, Internet Governance