- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Re: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 12, 2013

Aug. 12, 2013

They are in general not consistent with each other (although there are certainly common themes and in some cases common rules). One of the things we have discusssed is once the new ALAC rules are in place, we should begin a discussion on overall RALO rule revision and part of that discussion is looking at to what extent they should be the same or differ. Alan At 11/08/2013 07:14 PM, Glenn McKnight wrote: >Hi Alan >Are our NARALO Operating Policies consistent with the other RALO's? > >Glenn > >Glenn McKnight ><mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com>mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com >skype gmcknight >twitter gmcknight >. > > >On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Houle Louis ><<mailto:Louis.Houle@isocquebec.org>Louis.Houle(a)isocquebec.org> wrote: >Thanks Alan, > >Some other concern that may remain is: > >Is the second vote public ? Should it be >discussed and decided tomorrow? Are the >procedures clear (helpful) on that point? > > >Louis Houle >Président >La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec) ><mailto:Louis.Houle@isocquebec.org>Louis.Houle(a)isocquebec.org > >Le 2013-08-10 22:49, Alan Greenberg a écrit : > >That possible confusion is hopefully eliminated in the last revision. > >13. now clearly says that the Chair may cast a >second vote for ALAC member selections. > >19. Applies only to selection of the RALO Chair and Secretariat. > >Alan > >At 10/08/2013 07:57 PM, Houle Louis wrote: >Indeed! > >Louis Houle >Président >La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec) ><mailto:Louis.Houle@isocquebec.org>Louis.Houle(a)isocquebec.org > >Le 2013-08-09 13:54, Evan Leibovitch a écrit : >No, you're right. There is a confusion between #13 and #19. > >- Evan (via mobile) >On 2013-08-09 11:01 AM, "Thompson, Darlene" ><<mailto:DThompson1@gov.nu.ca>DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca> wrote: > >Oh - ignore that last one - I hadn't read paragraph 19 yet. My bad! > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >CAP Administrator >N-CAP/Department of Education >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >Phone: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5631>(867) 975-5631 >Fax: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5610>(867) 975-5610 ><mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca>dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca >________________________________________ >From: ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[ ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] >on behalf of Thompson, >Darlene [<mailto:DThompson1@gov.nu.ca>DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca] >Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 10:55 AM >To: Alan Greenberg; NA-Discuss >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures > >Refresh my memory. I had thought that we had come to a consensus that our >three ALAC members would be the tie breakers for Secretariat/Chair. Also, >under the proposed wording, what if the tie is the Chair position? The >existing Chair can't really cast the additional vote then. > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >CAP Administrator >N-CAP/Department of Education >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >Phone: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5631>(867) 975-5631 >Fax: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5610>(867) 975-5610 ><mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca>dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca >________________________________________ >From: ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[ ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] >on behalf of Alan Greenberg [ ><mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca] >Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 12:48 PM >To: NA-Discuss >Subject: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures > >Based on comments, I have made a few more changes. These are shown in BLUE. > >12/13. Normal procedure in the ALAC is now to hold secret votes for >elections/selections that are contended. The changes to 12 and 13 >allow the NARALO to do this as well. This is in fact how we have been >operating, so the change just ratifies our existing behavior. > >16. Correct and error that said a suspended ALS could regain their >active status by voting, but voting is the thing they are not allowed >to do if inactive. Also added a provision whereby NARALO can request >the the ALAC de-certify an essentially defunct ALS. The ALAC would >still need to conduct due diligence, so the procedures in NARALO do >not need to be exceedingly detailed. > >Last call for additional issues? > >Alan >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at <http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org >------ >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at <http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org >------ > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at <http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org >------ > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at <http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org >------ > > > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at <http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org >------ >

4 3

Re: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 12, 2013

Aug. 12, 2013

RALOs were each formed according to their own Memorandum of Understanding, which differ to some extent. However, the MoU is not a very detailed document (with a few exceptions), so the RALOs were relatively free to have variances, and in some cases did. This set of changes was not meant to address any of that. Just fix the things that are currently or in the recent past have bitten us. The number of changes illustrates that the rules DO need a cleanup since if that many things are problematic, what else is lurking there that has not bitten us recently. A few of those were identified during this discussion (such as language) and we are deferringthose less-pressing issues at this point. Alan At 12/08/2013 08:16 AM, Glenn McKnight wrote: >Yes, my point is that if we make revise our >procedures and are eventual policies we need >to be consistent with other RALO's which were >formed by the same set of motions by the iCANN >board and our charter and other RALO's are in >the spirit of the original motion. > >As all things the devil is in the details >G > >Glenn McKnight ><mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com>mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com >skype gmcknight >twitter gmcknight >. > > >On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Garth Bruen ><<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: >Thanks Alan, Glenn did you have some specific concern? > >-----Original Message----- >From: ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan >Greenberg >Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 8:30 PM >To: Glenn McKnight; Houle Louis >Cc: NARALO Discussion List >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures > >They are in general not consistent with each other (although there are >certainly common themes and in some cases common rules). One of the things >we have discusssed is once the new ALAC rules are in place, we should begin >a discussion on overall RALO rule revision and part of that discussion is >looking at to what extent they should be the same or differ. > >Alan > >At 11/08/2013 07:14 PM, Glenn McKnight wrote: > >Hi Alan > >Are our NARALO Operating Policies consistent with the other RALO's? > > > >Glenn > > > >Glenn McKnight > ><mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com><mailto:mcknig > ht.glenn(a)gmail.com>mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com > >skype gmcknight > >twitter gmcknight > >. > > > > > >On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Houle Louis > ><<mailto:Louis.Houle@isocquebec.org><mailto:Lou > is.Houle(a)isocquebec.org>Louis.Houle(a)isocquebec.org> wrote: > >Thanks Alan, > > > >Some other concern that may remain is: > > > >Is the second vote public ? Should it be discussed and decided > >tomorrow? Are the procedures clear (helpful) on that point? > > > > > >Louis Houle > >Président > >La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec) > ><mailto:Louis.Houle@isocquebec.org>Louis.Houle(a)isocquebec.org > > > >Le 2013-08-10 22:49, Alan Greenberg a écrit : > > > >That possible confusion is hopefully eliminated in the last revision. > > > >13. now clearly says that the Chair may cast a > >second vote for ALAC member selections. > > > >19. Applies only to selection of the RALO Chair and Secretariat. > > > >Alan > > > >At 10/08/2013 07:57 PM, Houle Louis wrote: > >Indeed! > > > >Louis Houle > >Président > >La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec) > ><mailto:Louis.Houle@isocquebec.org><mailto:Loui > s.Houle(a)isocquebec.org>Louis.Houle(a)isocquebec.org > > > >Le 2013-08-09 13:54, Evan Leibovitch a écrit : > >No, you're right. There is a confusion between #13 and #19. > > > >- Evan (via mobile) > >On 2013-08-09 11:01 AM, "Thompson, Darlene" > ><<mailto:DThompson1@gov.nu.ca><mailto:DThompson > 1(a)gov.nu.ca>DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca> wrote: > > > >Oh - ignore that last one - I hadn't read paragraph 19 yet. My bad! > > > >D > > > >Darlene A. Thompson > >CAP Administrator > >N-CAP/Department of Education > >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > >Phone: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5631><tel:%28867%29%20975-5631>(867) 975-5631 > >Fax: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5610><tel:%28867%29%20975-5610>(867) 975-5610 > ><mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca><mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca>dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > >________________________________________ > >From: > ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces@atlar ><http://ge-lists.icann.org>ge-lists.icann.org > >[ > ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces@atlar ><http://ge-lists.icann.org>ge-lists.icann.org] > >on behalf of Thompson, > >Darlene > [<mailto:DThompson1@gov.nu.ca><mailto:DThompson1@gov.nu.ca>DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca] > >Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 10:55 AM > >To: Alan Greenberg; NA-Discuss > >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures > > > >Refresh my memory. I had thought that we had come to a consensus that our > >three ALAC members would be the tie breakers for Secretariat/Chair. Also, > >under the proposed wording, what if the tie is the Chair position? The > >existing Chair can't really cast the additional vote then. > > > >D > > > >Darlene A. Thompson > >CAP Administrator > >N-CAP/Department of Education > >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > >Phone: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5631><tel:%28867%29%20975-5631>(867) 975-5631 > >Fax: <tel:%28867%29%20975-5610><tel:%28867%29%20975-5610>(867) 975-5610 > ><mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca><mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca>dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > >________________________________________ > >From: > ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces@atlar ><http://ge-lists.icann.org>ge-lists.icann.org > >[ > ><mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>na-discuss-bounces@atlar ><http://ge-lists.icann.org>ge-lists.icann.org] > >on behalf of Alan Greenberg [ > ><mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca><mailto:alan.g > reenberg(a)mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca] > >Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 12:48 PM > >To: NA-Discuss > >Subject: [NA-Discuss] 2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures > > > >Based on comments, I have made a few more changes. These are shown in BLUE. > > > >12/13. Normal procedure in the ALAC is now to hold secret votes for > >elections/selections that are contended. The changes to 12 and 13 > >allow the NARALO to do this as well. This is in fact how we have been > >operating, so the change just ratifies our existing behavior. > > > >16. Correct and error that said a suspended ALS could regain their > >active status by voting, but voting is the thing they are not allowed > >to do if inactive. Also added a provision whereby NARALO can request > >the the ALAC de-certify an essentially defunct ALS. The ALAC would > >still need to conduct due diligence, so the procedures in NARALO do > >not need to be exceedingly detailed. > > > >Last call for additional issues? > > > >Alan > >------ > >NA-Discuss mailing list > ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.o >rg > ><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listin > fo/na-discuss>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > >Visit the NARALO online at > <<http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org > >------ > >------ > >NA-Discuss mailing list > ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.o >rg > ><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listin > fo/na-discuss>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > >Visit the NARALO online at > <<http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org > >------ > > > >------ > >NA-Discuss mailing list > ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.o >rg > ><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listin > fo/na-discuss>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > >Visit the NARALO online at > <<http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org > >------ > > > > > >------ > >NA-Discuss mailing list > ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.o >rg > ><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listin > fo/na-discuss>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > >Visit the NARALO online at > <<http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org > >------ > > > > > > > > > >------ > >NA-Discuss mailing list > ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.o >rg > ><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listin > fo/na-discuss>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > >Visit the NARALO online at > <<http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org > >------ > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list ><mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at <http://www.naralo.org>http://www.naralo.org >------ >

1 0

2nd revision of NARALO Operating Procedures
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 12, 2013

Aug. 12, 2013

Based on comments, I have made a few more changes. These are shown in BLUE. 12/13. Normal procedure in the ALAC is now to hold secret votes for elections/selections that are contended. The changes to 12 and 13 allow the NARALO to do this as well. This is in fact how we have been operating, so the change just ratifies our existing behavior. 16. Correct and error that said a suspended ALS could regain their active status by voting, but voting is the thing they are not allowed to do if inactive. Also added a provision whereby NARALO can request the the ALAC de-certify an essentially defunct ALS. The ALAC would still need to conduct due diligence, so the procedures in NARALO do not need to be exceedingly detailed. Last call for additional issues? Alan

10 16

The internet in Cuba
by Eduardo Diaz Aug. 10, 2013

Aug. 10, 2013

Of possible interest... * http://laredcubana.blogspot.com/2013/08/alba-1-undersea-cable-background.ht… * -ed -- *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.

2 1

NARALO TELECONFERENCE - Monday, 11 June 2012 @ 19:00 UTC /Canceled
by Beau Brendler Aug. 10, 2013

Aug. 10, 2013

Colleagues, Due to a conflict that I cannot immediately resolve, the NA teleconference for today has been CANCELLED. I would recommend that we reschedule for next Monday. Regards, Beau -----Original Message----- >From: At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> >Sent: Jun 11, 2012 7:15 AM >To: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org>, NA-Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: [NA-Discuss] REMINDER/ NARALO TELECONFERENCE - Monday, 11 June 2012 @ 19:00 UTC > >Dear All, > >The next NARALO teleconference is scheduled for Monday, 11 June 2012 at >19:00 UTC > >For other times: http://tinyurl.com/d7ww2k4 > > The agenda (TO BE UPDATED) and call details can be found at: >https://community.icann.org/x/hgAQAg > >If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: >mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org. > >Thank you. > >Regards, > >Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie >Peregrine > >ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > >E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------

10 38

Operating Procedures for discussion at NARALO meeting on Monday
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 10, 2013

Aug. 10, 2013

Attached are a red-line and a clean version to be discussed at the NARALO meeting on Monday. There are only a small number of changes from the previous version (this time in purple): 13. Make it clear that the sentence on tie-breaking is for the ALAC member (the subject of the entire paragraph). 16. Grammar correction "participates IN online discussions" 17. Remove a redundant "submitting". This and older drafts can be found at https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+ROP+Review++2013. Alan

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO Operating Procedures
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 9, 2013

Aug. 9, 2013

I can live with it with or without the change (although I would keep the "normally" I added. The change only allows the Chair to bypass the process of trying to reach consensus... At 08/08/2013 01:16 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >Actually, in almost all of these cases there were multiple people >considering the positions. In the conversation leading to consensus, >some dropped out to enable a single consensus candidate. > >Where no such consensus was possible between the people considering >running and other NARALO members, there was a secret vote. > >I still don't think this point needs changing. Secret votes still >happen, but the region is enabled (and indeed is encouraged) to use >consensus where possible. > > > >On 8 August 2013 10:40, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >Evan, were there ever cases where there were more candidates than >slots and consensus was used? Alan > > >At 08/08/2013 04:34 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >>On 6 August 2013 10:15, Alan Greenberg >><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca > wrote: >>At 06/08/2013 08:31 AM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >> >> >>#12 refers to ALAC members being chosen by a rough consensus >>process. This has never been done. It has always been done by a >>voting process. The rough consensus wording should rather be used >>for routine decisions. >> >> >>I am happy to make such a change if there is such a will. >> >> >>I wouldn't say never. >> >>NARALO's first two non-ALAC reps -- Robert and Beau - were chosen >>by consensus, no vote was ever taken. I believe that Gareth's >>selection as well as my first, were also done that way. >> >>I would prefer to keep the option so to allow for the flexibility. >> >>- Evan > > > > >-- >Evan Leibovitch >Toronto Canada >Em: evan at telly dot org >Sk: evanleibovitch >Tw: el56

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO Operating Procedures
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 9, 2013

Aug. 9, 2013

At 06/08/2013 08:31 AM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >Nice job, Alan! > >I would also offer the following: > >#4 Only mentions English and French - Spanish should also be included. I also note that what is there is not actually correct, in that with very few exceptions, we have not translated anything (the Operating Principles) were among the very few I could find). I'm not saying that is good, but that is the reality. I would suggest that this section is not causing us any IMMEDIATE OPERATIONAL problems, and that when we do a re-write, we replace it with something that is both realistic and accurate, and adheres to the current ALAC/ICANN rules and policies. As such it will require more discussion than we want now to get these "fixes" in place. >#12 refers to ALAC members being chosen by a rough consensus >process. This has never been done. It has always been done by a >voting process. The rough consensus wording should rather be used >for routine decisions. I am happy to make such a change if there is such a will. >#16. If an ALS loses its voting status, how can it regain it through voting? This is something that we should fix, as cleaning up of ALAS status should be a high-priority issue. Can you offer a quick fix? One that comes to mind is that at the one year point they are notified and have one year to fix or we mark inactive and recommends decertification. Alan >Thanks! > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >CAP Administrator >N-CAP/Department of Education >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >Phone: (867) 975-5631 >Fax: (867) 975-5610 >dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca >________________________________________ >From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Alan >Greenberg [alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca] >Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 3:10 PM >To: NA-Discuss >Subject: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO Operating Procedures > >I offer the following draft of the reviser NARALO Operating Procedures > >In summary, I have changed: >- a number of things we noted before as problems but never fixed >- the tie-breaking which triggered this revision >- other important things I found along the way. > >All of our documents are BADLY in need of revision. This is NOT that >effort, but I have tried to fix the really serious issues and >particularly ones that have caused us problems in the past. > > >In detail by section number: > >7. Adding the possibility for a shared Secretariat, which already >implied in section 8 by the "person(s)". As far as I can find, we >have no "language requirements", so I deleted the reference to it. > >9. That is primarily where the ALAC Member responsibilities now >reside (or pointed to by RoP). > >11. Removal of the term "Statement of Interest" which now has another >meaning. Nominations is what this process is referred to in ALAC >docs, and in fact, that is what actually happens except in the rare >self-nomination case. > >12. Goes with above. > >15. Currently, only a rep of a true ALS can vote to alter the >Operating Procedures. The representative of unaffiliated members was >accidentally omitted. This fixes that. > >16. Since we say that selections should largely be by consensus, this >fits better than just counting votes which might not happen. > >17. Again removing a mis-used "Statement of Interest" and making the >process clear. I also made it clear how you lose unaffiliated >membership. I removed what is essentially an implementation issue >that did not belong in the rules and added a tie-breaking rule >patterned on that in 13. > >19. The new rule for tie-breaking in a Chair or Secretariat election. > >20. To counteract section 12.9 of the Procedure for Meetings which >says we vote like LAC, with weighted voting balancing countries. > >21. Fix the many discrepancies among documents. > >Comments? > >Alan

3 3

Re: [NA-Discuss] Monday's Meeting/Teleconference
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 9, 2013

Aug. 9, 2013

We need 70& of active ALSs, so may not be possible on a call unless we have really good turnout. But would be nice! Alan At 08/08/2013 10:22 AM, Eduardo Diaz wrote: >Is in the plan to vote or reach concensus on the ROP? > >-ed > > >On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Garth Bruen <gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > > > All, > > > > Due to the on-going election and pending changes to our ROP, the agenda for > > our monthly call will be focused on moving these concerns forward. I > > apologize for the disruption of our normal activities but these are > > obviously critical issues. > > > > I will be sending out a brief of the ROP changes. I suggest everyone become > > familiar with them. > > > > -Garth > > > > ------------------------------------- > > > > Garth Bruen > > gbruen(a)knujon.com > > > > 617-947-3805 > > http://www.knujon.com > > Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) > > http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 > > The Death of the Internet: > > http://astore.amazon.com/knujocom-20/detail/1118062418 > > Blog: > > http://www.digitalcitizensalliance.org/cac/alliance/blog.aspx?ident=garth > > Twitter: @Knujon > > > > > > ------ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > ------ > > > > > >-- >*NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or >subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named >addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, >disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by >mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------

6 5

Re: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO Operating Procedures
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 9, 2013

Aug. 9, 2013

Within ALAC, we have moved to all other personnel-related vote being secret. NARALO is not obliged to follow suit, but that is really the question in my mind. I would suggest that the rule be changed to say that in cases where there are more candidates than slots, it is the call of the chair whether to attempt consensus or go strain to a vote. Would that work with everyone? Alan At 08/08/2013 10:40 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >Evan, were there ever cases where there were more candidates than >slots and consensus was used? Alan > >At 08/08/2013 04:34 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >>On 6 August 2013 10:15, Alan Greenberg >><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >>At 06/08/2013 08:31 AM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >> >> >>#12 refers to ALAC members being chosen by a rough consensus >>process. This has never been done. It has always been done by a >>voting process. The rough consensus wording should rather be used >>for routine decisions. >> >> >>I am happy to make such a change if there is such a will. >> >> >>I wouldn't say never. >> >>NARALO's first two non-ALAC reps -- Robert and Beau - were chosen >>by consensus, no vote was ever taken. I believe that Gareth's >>selection as well as my first, were also done that way. >> >>I would prefer to keep the option so to allow for the flexibility. >> >>- Evan

2 1