I added text to OP's paragraph 10 to mention immediate seating of first ALAC reps.

I also tried to make text consistent with the following :

we vote for the Chair,
individuals have 2 votes, as if they were an ALS (while not explicitely mentioned, I suppose individuals will choose between themselves who votes for them),
rough consensus is used for selection of ALAC members,
Chair decides (instead of NomCom) when no consensus is reached.

Do we have rough consensus on this?

As for the voting representatives for each ALS (and the 2 individuals), couldn't we use the NA-ALS subscribers for this?

And lastly, I agree with Evan on litigation with ICANN,

_________________________________________
Luc Faubert
Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du changement /
IT governance and change management consulting
GFI Solutions
+1 514 236 5129
www.GFISolutions.com

www.LucFaubert.com
www.isoc.qc.ca
www.ccig.ca
www.maillons.qc.ca

From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bret Fausett
Sent: 31 janvier 2007 11:19
To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] NARALO documents

The MOU should say that selection occur "no later than" the annual meeting, which should allow us to move it up to an earlier time, whenever appropriate. In order to elect, we'll need a complete roster of approved At Large Structures and their designated representatives, which I assume we have someplace. Is that publicly posted (I assume?). What's the URL? Then we'll need appropriate notice and call for statements of interest.

Bret

On Jan 31, 2007, at 6:20 AM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:

I bring this up because the current draft Operating Principles would require that the regional representatives would be elected not upon signature of the MoU, but several months later at the ICANN International Meeting, scheduled for October 2007 in Asia.

Of course you are entirely free to adopt this procedure. I just wanted to highlight that you are not obligated to do so.