my comments related the ammendment
Here my analysis to share with you all related to the proposal amendments. I am not sure due my commit with NOMCOMM if I will will be able to participate in all sessions, so I decided to share my opinions with all of you. Point I have something to say in highlight below. Thanks VANDA Points proposed by one group My comments 1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation This is positive 2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there 3) removes the concept of operating by consensus
From my point of view this is against one of ICANN´s principle build consensus
4) creation of Vice President Those persons cannot be added to the normal representation at ALAC without the decision of ALAC itself. Not for LACRALO to decide. See also below on item 8 5) terms of President and Vice President eligible for two terms of 2 years each This make some sense, since representation in ALAC demands some degree of learning, so one year is short term indeed. But the second term shall be one year to allow others to participate. 6) creation of Vice Secretariat position Same of vice president 7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate). I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity. 8) The alternate or deputy can assume the ALAC rep in case of any inability of the primary ALAC rep I believe this shall be submitted to ALAC, We cannot decide next time the member sent to ALAC meeting is another 9) the ALAC member can be re-elected for a 2nd two year term Reelection has the same principle 1 year for second term to allow others to participate. 10) creation of a LACRALO Directory or LACRALO Board with administrative and operative functions. This will comprise the persons elected in LACRALO (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, the two LACRALO elected representatives to ALAC and their alternates) and five Policy Directors who would lead different working groups within LACRALO and in charge of selecting members within their working groups. Policy Directors would be elected by the General Assembly by simple majority. In my opinion this will mean too much generals and no troops to command but no impact at all. 3 would be good one member of Caribbean region and two from Latin region too keep diversity and at same time be reasonable ( there is no much members that really works in LACRALO so I don´t believe it will be groups enough to work under 5 policy directors). But not so relevant 11) establishing that elections can take place virtually This is good, but needs clear tools must be available to avoid one member to vote for all the ALSs under its command - only allow this after check the security of the tool. 12) amendments would be applicable to existing mandates of President, Secretary I am not in favor of that, only if was to have just one more year term. Application of the change in benefice of the existing elected members looks manipulation. Same people can be candidate and be elected, but extending the mandate, looks not democratic. That´s the way ditactors use to keeping in place Totally against. 13) The constitution of the Board of LACRALO be held after the first election to be held immediately at the time of these amendments be approved. Not so relevant. Vanda Scartezini Acesse: http://nomcom.icann.org e candidate-se! Access: http://nomcom.icann.org and apply! Polo Consultores Associados IT Trend Alameda Santos 1470 conj. 1407 01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil Tel + 5511 3266.6253 Mob + 55118181.1464 Dissemine esta idéia: Digite o dominio ao inves do telefone. Domain dialing Descrição: Descrição: Siter-16-square.png <http://www.siter.com> www.siter.com
Dear Vanda: When I saw the proposal and knowing the background on the so-called WG and the several proposals, I had concluded that what was eventually delivered was thorough cynicism. It was a vexation to the spirit. So I concluded that for me, the optimal response is that I shall be stuck 'mute of malice'. Seeing your contribution has allowed me the space to change my mind. I too share your general concerns with these proposals. And I support the explanations you have provided in almost all their details, including the remedial suggestions. Your intervention demonstrates a deep understanding of the values we expect a multistakeholder governance model should project and the means by which that could be achieved. Best, - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br> wrote:
Here my analysis to share with you all related to the proposal amendments. I am not sure due my commit with NOMCOMM if I will will be able to participate in all sessions, so I decided to share my opinions with all of you.
Point I have something to say in highlight below.
Thanks
VANDA
Points proposed by one group
My comments
1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation
This is positive
2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese
I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there
3) removes the concept of operating by consensus
From my point of view this is against one of ICANN´s principle – build consensus
4) creation of Vice President
Those persons cannot be added to the normal representation at ALAC without the decision of ALAC itself. Not for LACRALO to decide. See also below on item 8
5) terms of President and Vice President eligible for two terms of 2 years each
This make some sense, since representation in ALAC demands some degree of learning, so one year is short term indeed. But the second term shall be one year to allow others to participate.
6) creation of Vice Secretariat position
Same of vice president
7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their
respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate).
I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity.
8) The alternate or deputy can assume the ALAC rep in case of any inability of the primary ALAC rep
I believe this shall be submitted to ALAC, We cannot decide next time the member sent to ALAC meeting is another…
9) the ALAC member can be re-elected for a 2nd two year term
Reelection has the same principle 1 year for second term to allow others to participate.
10) creation of a LACRALO Directory or LACRALO Board with administrative and operative functions. This will comprise the persons elected in LACRALO (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, the two LACRALO elected representatives to ALAC and their alternates) and five Policy Directors who would lead different working groups within LACRALO and in charge of selecting members within their working groups. Policy Directors would be elected by the General Assembly by simple majority.
In my opinion this will mean “ too much generals and no troops to command” but no impact at all.
3 would be good – one member of Caribbean region and two from Latin region – too keep diversity and at same time be reasonable ( there is no much members that really works in LACRALO so I don´t believe it will be groups enough to work under 5 policy directors). But not so relevant
11) establishing that elections can take place virtually
This is good, but needs clear tools must be available to avoid one member to vote for all the ALSs under its “command” - only allow this after check the security of the tool.
12) amendments would be applicable to existing mandates of President, Secretary
I am not in favor of that, only if was to have just one more year term.
Application of the change in benefice of the existing elected members looks manipulation.
Same people can be candidate and be elected, but extending the mandate, looks not democratic. That´s the way ditactors use to keeping in place… Totally against.
13) The constitution of the Board of LACRALO be held after the first election to be held immediately at the time of these amendments be approved.
Not so relevant.
Vanda Scartezini
Acesse: http://nomcom.icann.org e candidate-se!
Access: http://nomcom.icann.org and apply!
Polo Consultores Associados
IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 – conj. 1407
01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil
Tel + 5511 3266.6253
Mob + 55118181.1464
Dissemine esta idéia:
Digite o dominio ao inves do telefone.
Domain dialing
Descrição: Descrição: Siter-16-square.png <http://www.siter.com> www.siter.com
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
Carlton, at this hour I think you will show those values much better by putting concrete proposals on the table, new or old. A esta hora, creo que el apego a esos valores se muestra mucho mejor poniendo sobre la mesa propuestas concretas, nuevas o viejas. Alejandro Pisanty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732 *Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com *LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty *Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 *Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org Participa en ICANN, http://www.icann.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________ Desde: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Carlton Samuels [carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 05 de marzo de 2012 13:36 Hasta: Vanda UOL CC: Heidi Ullrich; LAC DISCUSS; lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] my comments related the ammendment Dear Vanda: When I saw the proposal and knowing the background on the so-called WG and the several proposals, I had concluded that what was eventually delivered was thorough cynicism. It was a vexation to the spirit. So I concluded that for me, the optimal response is that I shall be stuck 'mute of malice'. Seeing your contribution has allowed me the space to change my mind. I too share your general concerns with these proposals. And I support the explanations you have provided in almost all their details, including the remedial suggestions. Your intervention demonstrates a deep understanding of the values we expect a multistakeholder governance model should project and the means by which that could be achieved. Best, - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br> wrote:
Here my analysis to share with you all related to the proposal amendments. I am not sure due my commit with NOMCOMM if I will will be able to participate in all sessions, so I decided to share my opinions with all of you.
Point I have something to say in highlight below.
Thanks
VANDA
Points proposed by one group
My comments
1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation
This is positive
2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese
I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there
3) removes the concept of operating by consensus
From my point of view this is against one of ICANN´s principle – build consensus
4) creation of Vice President
Those persons cannot be added to the normal representation at ALAC without the decision of ALAC itself. Not for LACRALO to decide. See also below on item 8
5) terms of President and Vice President eligible for two terms of 2 years each
This make some sense, since representation in ALAC demands some degree of learning, so one year is short term indeed. But the second term shall be one year to allow others to participate.
6) creation of Vice Secretariat position
Same of vice president
7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their
respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate).
I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity.
8) The alternate or deputy can assume the ALAC rep in case of any inability of the primary ALAC rep
I believe this shall be submitted to ALAC, We cannot decide next time the member sent to ALAC meeting is another…
9) the ALAC member can be re-elected for a 2nd two year term
Reelection has the same principle 1 year for second term to allow others to participate.
10) creation of a LACRALO Directory or LACRALO Board with administrative and operative functions. This will comprise the persons elected in LACRALO (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, the two LACRALO elected representatives to ALAC and their alternates) and five Policy Directors who would lead different working groups within LACRALO and in charge of selecting members within their working groups. Policy Directors would be elected by the General Assembly by simple majority.
In my opinion this will mean “ too much generals and no troops to command” but no impact at all.
3 would be good – one member of Caribbean region and two from Latin region – too keep diversity and at same time be reasonable ( there is no much members that really works in LACRALO so I don´t believe it will be groups enough to work under 5 policy directors). But not so relevant
11) establishing that elections can take place virtually
This is good, but needs clear tools must be available to avoid one member to vote for all the ALSs under its “command” - only allow this after check the security of the tool.
12) amendments would be applicable to existing mandates of President, Secretary
I am not in favor of that, only if was to have just one more year term.
Application of the change in benefice of the existing elected members looks manipulation.
Same people can be candidate and be elected, but extending the mandate, looks not democratic. That´s the way ditactors use to keeping in place… Totally against.
13) The constitution of the Board of LACRALO be held after the first election to be held immediately at the time of these amendments be approved.
Not so relevant.
Vanda Scartezini
Acesse: http://nomcom.icann.org e candidate-se!
Access: http://nomcom.icann.org and apply!
Polo Consultores Associados
IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 – conj. 1407
01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil
Tel + 5511 3266.6253
Mob + 55118181.1464
Dissemine esta idéia:
Digite o dominio ao inves do telefone.
Domain dialing
Descrição: Descrição: Siter-16-square.png <http://www.siter.com> www.siter.com
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
_______________________________________________ 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
Dear All: Some personal thoughts: Fatima was one of the two or three who worked very hard to have some proposal for our GA, try to attack her is a disrespect against hard-workers in our region, maximum when who hit her, forgot to present any alternative proposal to improve the previous proposed.I think we have a hard work to do in our GA, specially trying to identify who work seriously, and indentify who only make comments about comments but without any clear proposal. I hope we can show our possibility to work together and develop good work. For that, first is needed to leave personal aspirations and think in the region. God illuminate our actions. Queridos todos: Algunas reflexiones personales: Fátima fue uno de los doso tres, que trabajó muy duro para tener alguna propuesta de nuestraGA, tratar de atacar a ella es una falta de respeto contra el fuerte de trabajo en nuestra región, máxime cuando quien la golpeó, se olvidó depresentar una propuesta alternativa para mejorar la anterior propuesta.Creo que tenemos un trabajo difícil de hacer en nuestra Asamblea General, en especial tratando de identificar a personas que trabajan en serio, e identificar que sólo hacen comentarios acerca de los comentarios, pero sin ninguna propuesta clara.Espero que podamos demostrar nuestra posibilidad de trabajar juntos y desarrollar un buen trabajo. Para ello, primero es necesario dejar las aspiraciones personales y pensar en la región. Dios ilumine nuestras acciones.. Carlos Dionisio Aguirre NCA GNSO Council - ICANN former ALAC member by LACRALO Abogado - Especialista en Derecho de los Negocios Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina - *54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423 http://ar.ageiadensi.org
From: apisan@unam.mx To: carlton.samuels@gmail.com; vanda@uol.com.br Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 20:37:08 +0000 CC: Heidi.Ullrich@icann.org; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org; lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] [lac-discuss-es] my comments related the ammendment
Carlton,
at this hour I think you will show those values much better by putting concrete proposals on the table, new or old.
A esta hora, creo que el apego a esos valores se muestra mucho mejor poniendo sobre la mesa propuestas concretas, nuevas o viejas.
Alejandro Pisanty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732
*Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com *LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty *Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 *Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org Participa en ICANN, http://www.icann.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
________________________________________ Desde: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Carlton Samuels [carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 05 de marzo de 2012 13:36 Hasta: Vanda UOL CC: Heidi Ullrich; LAC DISCUSS; lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] my comments related the ammendment
Dear Vanda: When I saw the proposal and knowing the background on the so-called WG and the several proposals, I had concluded that what was eventually delivered was thorough cynicism. It was a vexation to the spirit. So I concluded that for me, the optimal response is that I shall be stuck 'mute of malice'.
Seeing your contribution has allowed me the space to change my mind. I too share your general concerns with these proposals. And I support the explanations you have provided in almost all their details, including the remedial suggestions.
Your intervention demonstrates a deep understanding of the values we expect a multistakeholder governance model should project and the means by which that could be achieved.
Best, - Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br> wrote:
Here my analysis to share with you all related to the proposal amendments. I am not sure due my commit with NOMCOMM if I will will be able to participate in all sessions, so I decided to share my opinions with all of you.
Point I have something to say in highlight below.
Thanks
VANDA
Points proposed by one group
My comments
1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation
This is positive
2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese
I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there
3) removes the concept of operating by consensus
From my point of view this is against one of ICANN´s principle – build consensus
4) creation of Vice President
Those persons cannot be added to the normal representation at ALAC without the decision of ALAC itself. Not for LACRALO to decide. See also below on item 8
5) terms of President and Vice President eligible for two terms of 2 years each
This make some sense, since representation in ALAC demands some degree of learning, so one year is short term indeed. But the second term shall be one year to allow others to participate.
6) creation of Vice Secretariat position
Same of vice president
7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their
respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate).
I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity.
8) The alternate or deputy can assume the ALAC rep in case of any inability of the primary ALAC rep
I believe this shall be submitted to ALAC, We cannot decide next time the member sent to ALAC meeting is another…
9) the ALAC member can be re-elected for a 2nd two year term
Reelection has the same principle 1 year for second term to allow others to participate.
10) creation of a LACRALO Directory or LACRALO Board with administrative and operative functions. This will comprise the persons elected in LACRALO (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, the two LACRALO elected representatives to ALAC and their alternates) and five Policy Directors who would lead different working groups within LACRALO and in charge of selecting members within their working groups. Policy Directors would be elected by the General Assembly by simple majority.
In my opinion this will mean “ too much generals and no troops to command” but no impact at all.
3 would be good – one member of Caribbean region and two from Latin region – too keep diversity and at same time be reasonable ( there is no much members that really works in LACRALO so I don´t believe it will be groups enough to work under 5 policy directors). But not so relevant
11) establishing that elections can take place virtually
This is good, but needs clear tools must be available to avoid one member to vote for all the ALSs under its “command” - only allow this after check the security of the tool.
12) amendments would be applicable to existing mandates of President, Secretary
I am not in favor of that, only if was to have just one more year term.
Application of the change in benefice of the existing elected members looks manipulation.
Same people can be candidate and be elected, but extending the mandate, looks not democratic. That´s the way ditactors use to keeping in place… Totally against.
13) The constitution of the Board of LACRALO be held after the first election to be held immediately at the time of these amendments be approved.
Not so relevant.
Vanda Scartezini
Acesse: http://nomcom.icann.org e candidate-se!
Access: http://nomcom.icann.org and apply!
Polo Consultores Associados
IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 – conj. 1407
01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil
Tel + 5511 3266.6253
Mob + 55118181.1464
Dissemine esta idéia:
Digite o dominio ao inves do telefone.
Domain dialing
Descrição: Descrição: Siter-16-square.png <http://www.siter.com> www.siter.com
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-es mailing list lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
Dear Alejandro: You would probably tell from my comments that although they are not offered as motions for decision as yet, I cannot support the proposals in play. Secondly, it is for those who are making the proposals to prepare them in the manner and form stipulated by the LACRALO Rules of Procedure. And when those are presented as such and the time comes, I shall oppose them in argument. And if a division is called by the presiding officer and their essence remain as proposed, I shall vote against them. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch <apisan@unam.mx
wrote:
Carlton,
at this hour I think you will show those values much better by putting concrete proposals on the table, new or old.
A esta hora, creo que el apego a esos valores se muestra mucho mejor poniendo sobre la mesa propuestas concretas, nuevas o viejas.
Alejandro Pisanty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732
*Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com *LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty *Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 *Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org Participa en ICANN, http://www.icann.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
________________________________________ Desde: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [ lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Carlton Samuels [carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 05 de marzo de 2012 13:36 Hasta: Vanda UOL CC: Heidi Ullrich; LAC DISCUSS; lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] my comments related the ammendment
Dear Vanda: When I saw the proposal and knowing the background on the so-called WG and the several proposals, I had concluded that what was eventually delivered was thorough cynicism. It was a vexation to the spirit. So I concluded that for me, the optimal response is that I shall be stuck 'mute of malice'.
Seeing your contribution has allowed me the space to change my mind. I too share your general concerns with these proposals. And I support the explanations you have provided in almost all their details, including the remedial suggestions.
Your intervention demonstrates a deep understanding of the values we expect a multistakeholder governance model should project and the means by which that could be achieved.
Best, - Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br> wrote:
Here my analysis to share with you all related to the proposal amendments. I am not sure due my commit with NOMCOMM if I will will be able to participate in all sessions, so I decided to share my opinions with all of you.
Point I have something to say in highlight below.
Thanks
VANDA
Points proposed by one group
My comments
1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation
This is positive
2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese
I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there
3) removes the concept of operating by consensus
From my point of view this is against one of ICANN´s principle – build consensus
4) creation of Vice President
Those persons cannot be added to the normal representation at ALAC without the decision of ALAC itself. Not for LACRALO to decide. See also below on item 8
5) terms of President and Vice President eligible for two terms of 2 years each
This make some sense, since representation in ALAC demands some degree of learning, so one year is short term indeed. But the second term shall be one year to allow others to participate.
6) creation of Vice Secretariat position
Same of vice president
7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their
respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate).
I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity.
8) The alternate or deputy can assume the ALAC rep in case of any inability of the primary ALAC rep
I believe this shall be submitted to ALAC, We cannot decide next time the member sent to ALAC meeting is another…
9) the ALAC member can be re-elected for a 2nd two year term
Reelection has the same principle 1 year for second term to allow others to participate.
10) creation of a LACRALO Directory or LACRALO Board with administrative and operative functions. This will comprise the persons elected in LACRALO (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, the two LACRALO elected representatives to ALAC and their alternates) and five Policy Directors who would lead different working groups within LACRALO and in charge of selecting members within their working groups. Policy Directors would be elected by the General Assembly by simple majority.
In my opinion this will mean “ too much generals and no troops to command” but no impact at all.
3 would be good – one member of Caribbean region and two from Latin region – too keep diversity and at same time be reasonable ( there is no much members that really works in LACRALO so I don´t believe it will be groups enough to work under 5 policy directors). But not so relevant
11) establishing that elections can take place virtually
This is good, but needs clear tools must be available to avoid one member to vote for all the ALSs under its “command” - only allow this after check the security of the tool.
12) amendments would be applicable to existing mandates of President, Secretary
I am not in favor of that, only if was to have just one more year term.
Application of the change in benefice of the existing elected members looks manipulation.
Same people can be candidate and be elected, but extending the mandate, looks not democratic. That´s the way ditactors use to keeping in place… Totally against.
13) The constitution of the Board of LACRALO be held after the first election to be held immediately at the time of these amendments be approved.
Not so relevant.
Vanda Scartezini
Acesse: http://nomcom.icann.org e candidate-se!
Access: http://nomcom.icann.org and apply!
Polo Consultores Associados
IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 – conj. 1407
01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil
Tel + 5511 3266.6253
Mob + 55118181.1464
Dissemine esta idéia:
Digite o dominio ao inves do telefone.
Domain dialing
Descrição: Descrição: Siter-16-square.png <http://www.siter.com> www.siter.com
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-es mailing list lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
Although most of time I've been lurking here because the Whois RT, I'm following some important discussions and here goes my two cents on Vanda's commentaries and also taking into consideration Jacqueline's last email about Brazil being "excluded" from the definitions. Omar 2012/3/3 Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br>:
1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation
This is positive
+1
2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese
I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there
I partially agree. If the target is more participation, the language should't be the barrier - I mean, only Brazil (and perhaps Portugal, Cabo Verde) will benefit from portuguese and French Guiana, Suriname and Haiti (directly) from french. If we consider Brazil should have more ALS it means we should have more brazilian structures beyond english/spanish spoken ones to a real representative participationtion. (...)
7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their
respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate).
I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity.
+1. If the adopted model is to Brazil and Haiti (taking the same example) has the same weight as countries (and doesn't matter the population rate), it's the same if Haiti (or Brazil, or Uruguai) has 3 or 13 ALS delegates. They should reach consensus anyway.
Omar I sent some other points to the list today , thanks for your feedback. Best hope to see you in CR. -----Mensagem original----- De: Omar Kaminski [mailto:omar@kaminski.adv.br] Enviada em: terça-feira, 6 de março de 2012 11:43 Para: Vanda UOL Cc: LAC DISCUSS Assunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] my comments related the ammendment Although most of time I've been lurking here because the Whois RT, I'm following some important discussions and here goes my two cents on Vanda's commentaries and also taking into consideration Jacqueline's last email about Brazil being "excluded" from the definitions. Omar 2012/3/3 Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br>:
1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a minimum level of participation
This is positive
+1
2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese
I don´t see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. ( but I don´t see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have there
I partially agree. If the target is more participation, the language should't be the barrier - I mean, only Brazil (and perhaps Portugal, Cabo Verde) will benefit from portuguese and French Guiana, Suriname and Haiti (directly) from french. If we consider Brazil should have more ALS it means we should have more brazilian structures beyond english/spanish spoken ones to a real representative participationtion. (...)
7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their
respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected ALAC member and their alternate).
I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must have diversity.
+1. If the adopted model is to Brazil and Haiti (taking the same example) has the same weight as countries (and doesn't matter the population rate), it's the same if Haiti (or Brazil, or Uruguai) has 3 or 13 ALS delegates. They should reach consensus anyway.
participants (5)
-
carlos dionisio aguirre -
Carlton Samuels -
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch -
Omar Kaminski -
Vanda UOL