- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Re: [NA-Discuss] The At-Large ICANN Board Candidate Selection
by Carlton Samuels Nov. 3, 2010

Nov. 3, 2010

Dear Colleagues & Friends: I hope you don't mind my 2 cents but I would wish to support the position argued by Darlene and others. We cannot disavow the role personality plays in these matters but let us be cautious on this. I like and have tremenduous respect for Avri. I deeply respect several others on the list who, too, didn't make the cut. But I hold that invoking the petition process at this time is counterproductive and, even more corrosive, rubbishes the work of the BCEC committee. The objective remains; the At-Large wishes to fill Seat No 15 on the ICANN Board with a member sympathetic, if not committed, to the At-Large agenda. The ABSdt Committee collected attributes and spent many months defining the candidate attribute set and selection criteria. Do have another look at the SOI; it was laid out to play like it was an infomercial - for the candidate. The process devised separated determination of the selection criteria from the evaluation process; the BCEC is peopled by members from the edge of the At-Large; ALS members. They collectively designed a selection process that included, among other steps designed to reduce the influence of personality, anonymised candidates for their process. They had two passes at the candidate list. And they produced 3 finalist candidates. Now, maybe our preferred candidate did not emerge from this process. And perhaps, like doting parents who are unanimous that our children are above average, our candidate is, of right, first among equals. But in the universe of things that could've happened and until I am otherwise convinced, this is hardly reason to say of the BCEC 'you did not get this right'. Maybe the next go-round will be more favourable to our favourite candidate. Let it be. Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 16:39:04 +0000 > From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson1(a)GOV.NU.CA> > Subject: [NA-Discuss] FW: Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates > To: "na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" > <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Message-ID: > <97657EF9087F754BBF54D3D0322DAD0F0294AE(a)IQALUITMX07.nunavut.local> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > Hi all, > > Actually, Garth Bruen did reply and stated that although he was on the > slate, too, he would oppose this. > > Why aren't we campaigning for Garth? He is excellent, too. > > This is why I *personally* think that we should allow the process to > continue and assume that the BCEC did its job. Elsewise, it comes down to > personalities and who we all like. I like Avri very much and think she > would do an excellent job but there were other people on the slate that I > thought just as qualified. > > This is just my opinion but it is also why I would be against this. I am > not going to go second guessing the very qualified people on the BCEC. > > D > > Darlene A. Thompson > CAP Administrator > N-CAP/Department of Education > P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > (867) 975-5610 > dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > ________________________________________ >

2 1

Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates
by Avri Doria Nov. 3, 2010

Nov. 3, 2010

To the members of NARALO: I sent the message below to Evan and he recommended I make my appeal directly to the list. My membership in NARALO is based on membership in ISOC-NY. I, therefore, ask this RALAO directly to consider endorsing me as a petition candidate to the ICANN BoD list. I believe that I offer an alternative to the candidates already on that list and that I would represent a strong position in favor of the interests of Internet users. As I mention below, I am available to answer any questions you might have. Thanks a. Begin forwarded message: > From: Avri Doria <avri(a)acm.org> > Date: 29 October 2010 20:38:17 EDT > To: evan(a)telly.org > > Dear Evan, > > I would appreciate it if NARALO would consider endorsing my applications as a petition candidate. > > My statement can be found at: <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2265195/At-Large+Director+…> > > I am available to answer any questions the RALAO might have. > > Thank you, > > Avri

8 12

FW: My Issues with the At-Large Election Process
by Heidi Ullrich Nov. 2, 2010

Nov. 2, 2010

Dear All, Please see below a message sent by Danny Younger on the subject of the At-Large Board Director selection process. Kind regards, Heidi Heidi Ullrich Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: + 1 (310) 578 - 8647 Fax: +1 (310) 823 - 8649 Cell/Mobile: +1 (310) 437 - 3956 -----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 6:11 AM To: ICANN At-Large Staff Subject: My Issues with the At-Large Election Process [Please forward to all the appropriate at-large and RALO lists] Dear members of the At-Large community, By now you are aware that in the At-Large Board Director selection process 43 Statements of Interest (SOIs) were received by the Board Candidate Evaluation Committee (BCEC). Three of those SOIs were from current and sitting members of the ALAC; forty were not. By an amazing coincidence only current and former ALAC members were selected for the candidate slate. On this basis alone, there are some that might wonder whether the at-large director selection process has, in fact, been captured. Others will look at the fact that the BCEC was entitled to select as many as 7 candidates (which would have allowed for more than one gender to be considered, or would have allowed for some "non-insiders" to be considered), and yet the BCEC for some unfathomable reason decided to narrow the field of otherwise qualified candidates down to only the three that were sitting or prior ALAC members... still another reason to suspect capture. We know that the ICANN Board Governance Committee had concerns about capture; their meeting minutes state: "Reviewed the proposed At-Large Board member selection process and potential risks of capture identified within the process." While their assessment was that the risk of capture was low, the preliminary election results tendered can readily lead one to a different conclusion. One also has to look at the fact that 49% of all SOIs were rejected before the process even began (ostensibly because they were deemed to be too incomplete to proceed further). In what other election process are that many candidates rejected out of hand before the election even begins? Clearly there is something seriously wrong with this picture. If the Statement of Interest application form was so poorly written that almost half of all applications were improperly completed, then it is an inescapable conclusion that the process itself was seriously flawed. We know as well that ICANN Staff has provided a certain degree of support to some of the 22 candidates that hadn't fully completed their SOIs. At issue is why Staff didn't offer comparable support to the other 21 applicants who were initially rejected. Additionally, we are confronted with the fact that the at-large director selection process was announced on the internal ALAC-related lists on 21 July, but press releases in Arabic, Chinese (Simplified), French, German, Portugese (Brazilian), Russian and Spanish weren't issued until 26 August -- you will note that the deadline for applications was only 11 days thereafter (on 6 September). One has to wonder how many SOIs weren't received owing simply to the the short time span between the international press release date and the final application deadline. One also has to wonder about how much of an advantage was thereby given to "insiders" that were aware of the process for a full month longer than applicants who first heard about the election when the Press releases were issued in languages other than English. Recently, the ABSdt announced a revised timeline that requires the RALO petition process to be completed on or before 7 November, yet no e-mail notices have gone out to any of the candidates to advise them of the timeline changes. Is this fair to the bulk of the candidates that may not even know of the existence of the ABSdt mailing list? All of us intuitively understand that a flawed process can certainly yield a flawed outcome. So what do we do at this point? While I understand the rush to have an at-large director seated (just as I understand the rush to have new gTLDs launched), I also understand that as a community we are better served by "doing it right" than by adhering to the results of what may be perceived as a tainted or seriously flawed election process. Yes, I recognize that it is always exceedingly difficult to stop a moving train, but I remain of the view that this election process has already been damaged to the degree that it should be stopped dead in its tracks for the good of the at-large community. I understand that these views may not be popular with some, but this election process, in my opinion, has proven to be not as fair and properly orchestrated as it could have been. best regards, Danny Younger

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates
by Beau Brendler Nov. 2, 2010

Nov. 2, 2010

right...we don't have time to be exhausting ourselves on process when we should be spending our energy advocating for users...why would we waste time and hours convening them to review the backgrounds of the candidates if we are then going to disregard their choices? Surely they had to take things like geographic representation and gender into account let's move on -----Original Message----- >From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca> >Sent: Nov 2, 2010 12:39 PM >To: "na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: [NA-Discuss] FW: Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates > > >Hi all, > >Actually, Garth Bruen did reply and stated that although he was on the slate, too, he would oppose this. > >Why aren't we campaigning for Garth? He is excellent, too. > >This is why I *personally* think that we should allow the process to continue and assume that the BCEC did its job. Elsewise, it comes down to personalities and who we all like. I like Avri very much and think she would do an excellent job but there were other people on the slate that I thought just as qualified. > >This is just my opinion but it is also why I would be against this. I am not going to go second guessing the very qualified people on the BCEC. > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >CAP Administrator >N-CAP/Department of Education >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >(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 Evan Leibovitch [evan(a)telly.org] >Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 5:58 PM >To: Eduardo Diaz >Cc: NARALO Discussion List >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates > >On 1 November 2010 17:05, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> I have only received emails supporting Avry. I have not seen the opposing >> ones. >> >> Evan: Can you generalize the reasons why some are against it? >> > > >Some are opposed to a specific petition (for Avri). > >Others are against having a petition at all (ie, the BCEC did its job and we >trust its people that did what they were asked to do). The implication is >that, since the BCEC _could_ have put more than three candidates on the >ballot, it must have had sufficient reason to limit the final cut to the >three that it did. > >That's as much of a generalization as I feel comfortable doing. > >As for the reasons why these comments were made privately, I can only >speculate that it's because we're talking about people rather than policies >... and some NARALO members commenting may believe that they could be >treated differently by their peers for speaking their opinions honestly. >It's not for me to judge if those beliefs are warranted. > >Those people have, for certain, read the calls here for open debate. It is >their call how they choose to proceed. I am simply noting the fact that, >unusually for NARALO, we have a significant divide. > >I myself am genuinely undecided. I like Avri personally and professionally, >I work with her on committees and greatly appreciate what she brings to >end-user advocacy. I also trust the judgments of the people on the BCEC, >including NARALO's two representatives. I know they had a very difficult >task, and I am confident that a suitable advocate for Internet end-users can >be elected from amongst the three people that the BCEC *did* submit. At this >point I am more concerned about the campaign becoming a Jerry Springer >episode on a global stage than I am about sending an unqualified person to >the position. > >Right now the only thing of which I am certain is that I am thoroughly >exhausted by this whole process, long before the vote takes place. > >- Evan >------ >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 >------ > >------ >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 >------

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates
by Michael Maranda Nov. 2, 2010

Nov. 2, 2010

I don't know Avri, but I have respect for those who have publicly endorsed her, and I see no problem with a petition process. MM

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] Fwd: ALAC BoD Candidates
by Evan Leibovitch Nov. 1, 2010

Nov. 1, 2010

On 1 November 2010 10:42, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca> wrote: > Hi all, > > I would first like to know why she was not considered in the first place. > Well, the BCEC made that the decision, and it is not a good precedent to demand the group to explain its decisions in ways that can betray its confidential nature. It is a legitimate question of Avri if she is aware of any reason that may have prevented her inclusion on the ballot. Beyond that, I'm not sure the question is easily answerable. - Evan

1 0

Announcement of At-Large selected voting Board Director candidates
by Heidi Ullrich Oct. 31, 2010

Oct. 31, 2010

Dear All, Please find below a message sent on behalf of Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Chair of the ALAC and the BCEC. ** Dear All, As Chair of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and the At-Large Board Candidate Evaluation Committee (BCEC), it gives me great honor to announce that following the Board passing the resolution agreeing to the Bylaws amendments needed to allow for the seating of the At-Large selected voting Board Director during their meeting earlier today (resolution available at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+-+Board+Resolution+on+Byla…) the BCEC has selected a slate of 3 candidates for the position. They are identified below in alphabetical order by family name: · Sébastien Bachollet · Pierre Dandjinou · Alan Greenberg The Statements of Interest (SOI) from the 3 candidates as well as the 19 other applicants reviewed are available on the At-Large Candidate Workspace (workspace available at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Director+Candidate+201…) The current time-line for the Board Director selected by the ALAC/At-Large Community is: · 28 October: BCEC to announce slate of 3-7 candidates and SOI details; · 28 October - 12 November: Campaigning period, including community call for candidate debate, and RALO discussions on candidates; · 15-19 November: RALO discussions on candidates continue and ALAC and RALO chairs vote for At-Large Director; · 10 December: Successful candidate takes seat on ICANN Board. A diagram of this time-line is available at Time-Line for At-Large Board Director Selection 2010.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2265195/Time-Line+for+At-L…>. However, please note that this time-line may change slightly pending an extraordinary meeting of the At-Large Board Selection design team scheduled for Monday, 1 November. To provide you with more information on the selection process, a diagram of the 2010 At-Large Board Director Candidate Selection process is available at At-Large Candidate Selection Process 2010 Diagram.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2265195/At-Large+Candidate…>. The BCEC warmly congratulate the slate of 3 candidates and look forward to a stimulating campaigning period. The BCEC were also delighted with, and were full of appreciation for, the extraordinarily high standard of all the conforming applicant SOI's received. Regards, Cheryl Langdon-Orr Chair of the2010 BCEC, Chair of the ALAC 2007-2010 ** Kind regards, Heidi Heidi Ullrich Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: + 1 (310) 578 - 8647 Fax: +1 (310) 823 - 8649 Cell/Mobile: +1 (310) 437 - 3956

4 3

Re: [NA-Discuss] [EURO-Discuss] Announcement of At-Large selected voting Board Director candidates
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Oct. 30, 2010

Oct. 30, 2010

As the desired outcome is for a single seat to be occupied by someone selected by At-Large who is not selected on region or gender, but on the stated criteria, there was no requirement to look to gender balance in the slate... However I hope you will be pleased to hear that female applicant(s) were in the 1st and second round deliberations that the committee undertook... But YES we DO need to keep doing more to encourage and attract highly qualified and dedicated women into leadership roles in ICANN and certainly onto the Board I know the Chair of the 2011 Nom Com is also very keen to see this as an outcome from their processes (which do of course need to try and address such matters of diversity). For my part I'll be outreaching to my Women on Boards group here in Australia when that time comes to see if that helps... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 30 October 2010 10:25, Avri Doria <avri(a)ltu.se> wrote: > Hi, > > Good gender balance. > > Hard to imagine that out of 22 applicants there was not a single woman that > met your criteria. > > a. > > On 29 Oct 2010, at 00:47, Heidi Ullrich wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > Please find below a message sent on behalf of Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Chair > of the ALAC and the BCEC. > > > > ** > > > > Dear All, > > > > As Chair of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and the At-Large Board > Candidate Evaluation Committee (BCEC), it gives me great honor to announce > that following the Board passing the resolution agreeing to the Bylaws > amendments needed to allow for the seating of the At-Large selected voting > Board Director during their meeting earlier today (resolution available at: > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+-+Board+Resolution+on+Byla…) > the BCEC has selected a slate of 3 candidates for the position. They are > identified below in alphabetical order by family name: > > > > > > · Sébastien Bachollet > > > > · Pierre Dandjinou > > > > · Alan Greenberg > > > > The Statements of Interest (SOI) from the 3 candidates as well as the 19 > other applicants reviewed are available on the At-Large Candidate Workspace > (workspace available at: > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Director+Candidate+201… > ) > > > > The current time-line for the Board Director selected by the > ALAC/At-Large Community is: > > > > · 28 October: BCEC to announce slate of 3-7 candidates and SOI > details; > > > > · 28 October - 12 November: Campaigning period, including > community call for candidate debate, and RALO discussions on candidates; > > > > · 15-19 November: RALO discussions on candidates continue and > ALAC and RALO chairs vote for At-Large Director; > > > > · 10 December: Successful candidate takes seat on ICANN Board. > > > > A diagram of this time-line is available at Time-Line for At-Large Board > Director Selection 2010.pdf< > https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2265195/Time-Line+for+At-L… > >. > > > > However, please note that this time-line may change slightly pending an > extraordinary meeting of the At-Large Board Selection design team scheduled > for Monday, 1 November. > > > > To provide you with more information on the selection process, a diagram > of the 2010 At-Large Board Director Candidate Selection process is available > at At-Large Candidate Selection Process 2010 Diagram.pdf< > https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2265195/At-Large+Candidate… > >. > > > > The BCEC warmly congratulate the slate of 3 candidates and look forward > to a stimulating campaigning period. The BCEC were also delighted with, and > were full of appreciation for, the extraordinarily high standard of all the > conforming applicant SOI's received. > > > > Regards, > > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > > > > Chair of the2010 BCEC, > > Chair of the ALAC 2007-2010 > > > > ** > > Kind regards, > > Heidi > > > > Heidi Ullrich > > Director for At-Large > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > Telephone: + 1 (310) 578 - 8647 > > Fax: +1 (310) 823 - 8649 > > Cell/Mobile: +1 (310) 437 - 3956 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EURO-Discuss mailing list > > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > > > >

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Announcement of At-Large selected voting Board Director candidates
by Beau Brendler Oct. 29, 2010

Oct. 29, 2010

I can't speak for the unaffiliated members, though would be willing to do so if they wish to send me direction or comments. Maybe it can just get all aired out here. At any rate the answers below are mine only. -----Original Message----- >From: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> >Sent: Oct 29, 2010 8:39 AM >To: NARALO Discussion List <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Announcement of At-Large selected voting Board Director candidates > >Hello everyone. > >As Heidi has posted, the BCEC has posted its slate of three candidates for >the position of At-Large-selected member of the ICANN Board. A community >call is being planned to interview > > >As a region we now have some decisions to make > > > 1. Are we satisfied with the slate of three candidates, or do we want to > participate in a petition process to add candidates who submitted > nominations or were left off the slate? I would at least like to have the feeling that a wider range of individuals participated. Can we not just have our own straw vote on the full slate (of qualified candidates), down to three? > > 2. EURALO as a region, and Danny Younger (who was nominated as a > candidate but not selected for the BCEC slate) have asked for time > extensions to make the voting period longer. This will give more time to > consider the candidates but potentially postpone the sitting of the new > Director by up to four months. Do you as ALS representatives need more than > 11 days to determine a preference? Eleven days is ample, and I agree with any calls to make the voting period longer. > > 3. As NARALO Chair and one of 20 votes in the final selection, I made a > commitment to find out your preferences -- amongst ALSs and individual > members -- between the three candidates (plus any others that may be added > by petition) > > >I would like to find out the views of NARALO members on these issues. My >preference is that you post your response publicly (ie, to this list) but if >you feel more comfortable responding privately by email or Skype, that is OK >too). > >- Evan > > > > > >On 29 October 2010 00:47, Heidi Ullrich <Heidi.Ullrich(a)icann.org> wrote: > >> >> the BCEC has selected a slate of 3 candidates for the position. They are >> identified below in alphabetical order by family name: >> >> >> · Sébastien Bachollet >> >> · Pierre Dandjinou >> >> · Alan Greenberg >> [...] >> >------ >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 >------

1 0

At-Large Board Selection Design Team needs a member
by Evan Leibovitch Oct. 29, 2010

Oct. 29, 2010

Hi all One of the two NARALO representatives on the above committee (abbreviated "ABSdt") has resigned to run for the At-Large Director position. I would like to find out if anyone here is interested in helping to put the finishing touches on the process by which At-Large chooses its first directly-selected Director. The role is important but should not take significantly more time as most of the work is already done. This is *not* the same as the committee that has received and is doing due diligence on those who have applied for the position. - Evan

2 1