[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: AVISO VOTO: 2015 VOTO PARA REPRESENTANTE LACRALO ALAC / 2015 VOTO PARA REPRESENTANTE A LA LACRALO ALAC De: carlton.samuels@gmail.com Estimado Chris: En esto estoy absolutamente seguro. En LACRALO, una asamblea general es un físico así como una reunión virtual en virtud de los detalles. La convocatoria de un voto es una asamblea general. ¿Por qué? Todos los miembros son credenciales y que se considere la actualidad. La pregunta ante la asamblea es el voto. El plazo fijado para la duración es el período del debate sobre la cuestión. La moción elevada sobre una cuestión de orden es hacia la cuestión antes de la Asamblea. La moción es clara; la cuestión antes de la asamblea es inadecuado, la asamblea es ilegal y es el resultado de las infracciones de las normas de procedimiento. Es el liderazgo que es responsable. Y la asamblea debe disolverse. Se disuelve la asamblea, siempre y cuando una moción de censura en el se pasa el liderazgo. Mi moción debe ser resuelto antes de tomar la pregunta antes de la asamblea. El Presidente tiene la obligación de llevar a mi movimiento ahora a votación. El hecho de que somos virtual no rescindir o de cualquier manera subvertir el Regla de la Orden. Cualquier acción que destruye una candidatura válida está corrompiendo el proceso. Cualquier acción que subvierte el imperio de la orden también corrompe el proceso. No se trata de apaciguamiento. Se trata de la regla. Saludos cordiales, Ritz-Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton Un Samuels Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planeación, Gobierno, Evaluación y plazos de entrega * ============================= El Jue, 10 de septiembre 2015 a las 10:24 AM, Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte@icann.org> escribió:

I have continued to read the posts on this list. It is always useful to have passion for your ideas, but sometimes it is a good idea to be careful when you disagree with somebody, and debate the issue and not the person. Mostly members of the list have recognised the ICANN rules for civil discourse. I hope this continues

I have also seen the motion which has been sent through by Carlton Samuels seeking a vote of no confidence in the LACRALO leadership. I have also seen the suggestion that this should prevent the vote currently running, from being completed. It is not my place to give a legal opinion about the constitutionality and whether this should bring the voting to a halt. But I do observe that a vote of no confidence in the leadership, and the voting procedure currently underway are separate issues. I realise that the voting is regarded as an assembly by some, but a vote of no confidence in the leaders is more properly the subject of a separate process, rather than a measure which will halt the voting. It would be unfair to stop the current voting, when it is nearly completed, and when so many have gone to the trouble of discussing the candidates, making comments and placing votes.

I recognise that many ALS®s in LACRALO (including but not exclusively ALS from the Caribbean) are distressed that Lance Hinds in the Caribbean are distressed that the candidate did not succeed in the last round, and it is unfortunate that he made the decision to decline nomination in the current round as this does leave the Caribbean without the voice which they are seeking. I completely understand why he felt that way after the rejection in the previous round, and I am disappointed that there was considerable unfair criticism of him. I’m sure this unfair criticism was at least in part why he declined nomination. But there are still two candidates, and I would encourage everyone to consider their backgrounds, and place votes before the close.

If members wish to continue with the motion for no-confidence, then that will need to be considered at a properly convened assembly. Members have the absolute right to bring such motions, and of course there will be some debate.

In the longer view, I am concerned that some LACRALO members feel excluded from the RALO. I would hope that all participants take on board the strong views, and think about why there is this perception of exclusion and marginalisation. Each Regional At-Large Organisation will have very diverse members, who hold very diverse views about many subjects. Having different views is actually very important, because it then ensures that subjects are discussed fully. We all have different and sometimes passionate views, but my aim as the ombudsman is to work with everybody to reconcile different views when possible, and to also ensure that groups are treated fairly, to preserve their rights to express different views. I am ready at any time to listen to specific issues, and could even meet with those of you who will be in Dublin to try and reconcile some different views.

Chris LaHatte

Ombudsman

Blog https://omblog.icann.org/

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman

Confidentiality

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential. The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint. The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint

*From:* lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Carlton Samuels *Sent:* Thursday, September 10, 2015 7:12 AM *To:* Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com> *Cc:* lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org *Subject:* Re: [lac-discuss-en] VOTE NOTICE: 2015 VOTE FOR REPRESENTATIVE LACRALO ALAC / 2015 VOTE FOR REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LACRALO ALAC

Humberto:

I'm not sure what the translation gave you but the English language version is authoritative.

I started the entire thread by plaininly noting the words "Point of Order" so it could not be mistaken.

I waited until the election is called - and the General Assembly is in session - because I needed a question to be asked and a debate to ensue.

The question is the vote.

The 7-day period is the time to debate the question.

What you quoted is perfectly clear that the motion is properly placed and the presiding officer is duty bound to take the motion.

That you asked for a translation of the motion is evidence that the motion is accepted.

Now you come up with this Pinochet-style Rule of Order! What is wrong with you?

In the meanwhile, the presiding officer, the LACRALO Chair, is mute, maybe with malice.

-Carlton Samuels.

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com> wrote:

Mr. Samuels,

To further clarify our position, we want to explain the nature of what is a point of order.

The UNGA Rules of Procedure, in particular, Article 79 of Annex IV (a) of the Rules of the General Assembly, gives a concept of what a point of order:

79. The Special Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the following text as a description of the concept of a point of order [para. 229]:

*"(a) A point of order is basically an intervention directed to the presiding officer, requesting him to make use of some power inherent in his office or specifically given him under the rules of procedure*. It may, for example, relate to the manner in which the debate is conducted, to the maintenance of order, to the observance of the rules of procedure or to the way in which presiding officers exercise the powers conferred upon them by the rules. Under a point of order, a representative may request the presiding officer to apply a certain rule of procedure or he may question the way in which the officer applies the rule. Thus, within the scope of the rules of procedure, representatives are enabled to direct the attention of the presiding officer to violations or misapplications of the rules by other representatives or by the presiding officer himself. A point of order has precedence over any other matter, including procedural motions (rules 73 [114] [Rule 71 [113] of the present rules of procedure] and 79 [120] [Rule 77 [119] of the present rules of procedure]).

"(b) Points of order raised under rule 73 [114]n involve questions necessitating a ruling by the presiding officer, subject to possible appeal. *They are therefore distinct from the procedural motions provided for in rules 76* [117] [Rule 74 [116] of the present rules of procedure] to 79 [120]o which can be decided only by a vote and on which more than one motion may be entertained at the same time, rule 79 [120]o laying down the precedence of such motions. *They are also distinct from requests for information or clarification, or from remarks relating to material arrangements (seating, interpretation system, temperature of the room), documents, translations, etc., which - while they may have to be dealt with by the presiding officer - do not require rulings from him. However, in established United Nations practice, a representative intending to submit a procedural motion or to seek information or clarification often rises to 'a point of order' as a means of obtaining the floor. The latter usage, which is based on practical grounds, should not be confused with the raising of points of order under rule 73 [114]*.

If your request is reviewed, it can be observed that the request it is not directed to the President ‘*requesting him to make use of some power inherent in his office or specifically given him under the rules of procedure*', but you requests ‘*That the general assembly demonstrate its lack of confidence in the LACRALO leadership and vote on this motion*’.

In simple terms, what you say is a point of order, it's really not. It is therefore not possible to give such treatment.

Regards

El 10/09/2015 a las 3:39, Carlton Samuels escribió:

Humberto:

With the greatest of patience, you are wrong. Again.

You are advised to read motion again then consult the Rule of Procedure closely. Rule 18 contains the authority and guidance for action.

The motion was timed for a General Assembly. The question pertaining the vote and distribution of credentials to members made it so.

The vote IS the question for decision.

All the reasons for the motion are concatenated; an illegal assembly, a failure of process etc. The vote IS the question under discussion.

If you don't understand the reason for not invoking Rule 8, I can explain it to you.

I drafted the original Rules of Procedure and remain the competent authority.

-Carlton Samuels

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Jacqueline,

By this email we respond to your request.

Overall, we estimate that we cannot suspend the election for the following reasons:

1. The voting process began on Thursday, September 3, 2015, and runs until Thursday, September 10, 2015 until 23:00 hours.

2. The motion of Mr. Samuels was presented on Friday, September 4, 2015.

In his email, Mr. Samuels raised a Point of Order and offered a motion of NO CONFIDENCE in the LACRALO leadership.

He pointed out some arguments to justify his action and then he ended with:

"Resolved:

That the general assembly demonstrate its lack of confidence in the LACRALO leadership and vote on this motion."

Thus, this paragraph says nothing about any suspension.

3. On 5 September, we informed to Mr Samuels that we requested an official translation to Spanish of his motion to be sent to the LACRALO's Spanish list.

4. Subsequently, the 7th of September 2015 Alberto Soto informed that he had asked for legal advice from ICANN’s legal staff regarding this motion of censure.

5. The RoP in Articles 8.1 and 8.2 states the following:

8.1 During a discussion, any delegate may raise a point of order; such a point of order shall be immediately decided upon by the presiding officer.

8.2 An appeal may be made against the ruling of the presiding officer. Such an appeal shall be put to the vote immediately and the presiding officer's ruling shall stand, unless overruled by a simple majority of the ALS present and voting.

These rules are silent regarding any suspension. Neither there has been any appeal. In any case, an appeal did not suspend the current vote.

6. There are articles relating to the suspension in Rule 9 that provides:

Rule 9 - Procedural Motions

9.1 During a discussion, any delegate may move the suspension or adjournment of the meeting or the adjournment or closure of the debate.

9.2 Such a motion shall be put to the vote immediately. Subject to Rule 8.1, such motions shall have precedence in the following order over all other proposals or motions before the meeting:

(a) Suspension of the meeting;

(b) Adjournment of the meeting;

(c) Adjournment of the debate on the question under discussion;

(d) Closure of the debate on the question under discussion.

7. - Finally, with regard to the arguments and accusations of Mr. Samuels, they will be answered once the official translation into Spanish is sent to the LACRALO's Spanish list.

Regards.

Alberto Soto Humberto Carrasco

El 09/09/2015 a las 15:39, Jacqueline Morris escribió:

Hi Humberto

I'm confused - there was a motion on the table from Carlton - the motion of No Confidence. According to the RoP, this motion needs to be debated and voted BEFORE the vote on ALAC rep can continue (it takes precedence). This hasn't been done, so how can the vote on ALAC rep be ending tomorrow?

Or was there a vote on the motion and I missed it?

I am particularly concerned given the number of procedural mistakes that seem to have occurred recently. We don't want more issues with this vote.

Jacqueline A. Morris

Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and Free. (after Chris Lehmann <http://twitter.com/chrislehmann> )

2015-09-09 9:18 GMT-04:00 <hcarrascob@gmail.com>:

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

Subject: Re: VOTE NOTICE: 2015 VOTE FOR REPRESENTATIVE LACRALO ALAC / 2015 VOTE FOR REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LACRALO ALAC From: hcarrascob@gmail.com

Dear,

Do not forget that within Voting ends tomorrow Thursday 10 September 2015 at 23:00 UTC.

Cheers

The 04/09/2015 at 0:00, staff@atlarge.icann.org wrote:

...

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

Asunto: VOTO ANUNCIO: 2015 VOTO PARA LACRALO ALAC REPRESENTANTE / 2015 VOTO PARA REPRESENTANTE DE LACRALO ANTE EL ALAC De: staff@atlarge.icann.org

[ES] Queridos todos,

LACRALOs Presidencia y Secretaría gustaría anunciar el inicio de la votación al Representante LACRALO ALAC para el período de dos años a partir de las Al final de la reunión de Dublín ICANN en octubre de 2015. Esta encuesta estará abierta desde jueves 03 septiembre 2015 hasta Jueves 10 de septiembre 2015 a las 23:00 UTC.

*** PREGUNTA: ¿A quién apoyas a convertirse en el ALAC Representante LACRALO para el período de dos años a partir de finales de la reunión de la ICANN en Dublín 10 2015? Por favor, seleccionar un candidato de la lista de abajo (que se enumeran por orden alfabético del nombre de la familia) o abstenerse: * Harold Arcos * Juan Manuel Rojas * Abstenerse *** Información adicional se puede encontrar en la página de elecciones Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/moAQAw.

==

[ES] Hola a todos,

El Presidente y secretario de LACRALOs quisieran anunciar el inicio del por voto párrafo Elegir al Representante de LACRALO ante el ALAC Representante EL PERIODO DE 2 aos Empezando al final de de la reunin de Dubln en Octubre del 2015. La votacin estarabierta desde el Lunes 03 de Setiembre 2015 al Viernes 10 de Setiembre 2015 a las 23:00 UTC.

*** PREGUNTA: A quien Elige Usted Para Ser Representante del LACRALO ante el ALAC POR EL PERIODO DE 2 aos Comenzando en la reunión de la ICANN en Octubre del 2015? Por favor ELIJA UN Candidato de la Lista Abajo (en Orden alfabtico) o abstngase: * Harold Arcos * Juan Manuel Rojas * Abstencin *** Informacin Adicional Se Puede Encontrar En La pgina WIKI: https://community.icann.org/x/moAQAw.

Saludos,

Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine y Terri Agnew El personal de ICANN política en apoyo de ALAC E-mail: staff@atlarge.icann.org Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann < https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> AtLarge < https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @ < https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> < https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

[[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/6bec3b3aba.html --]]